David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Bioethics 25 (8):472-478 (2011)
Both human research and animal research operate within established standards and procedures. Although the human research environment has been criticized for its sometimes inefficient and imperfect process, reported abuses of human subjects in research served as the impetus for the establishment of the Nuremberg Code, Declaration of Helsinki, and the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research and the resulting Belmont Report. No similar, comprehensive and principled effort has addressed the use of animals in research. Although published policies regarding animal research provide relevant regulatory guidance, these policies have not emerged from the process of specifying consistent and reasoned ethical principles. The lack of a fundamental effort to explore the ethical issues and principles regarding the use of animals in research has led to unclear and disparate policies. Recent studies have increased our understanding of animal cognition and emotion, suggesting that animals' potential for experiencing a wide variety of harms, such as pain and fear, is greater than has been previously appreciated. Furthermore, relationships between methods of captivity and certain laboratory procedures and the resulting adverse physical, social and psychological effects have been established. In light of this information, current protections may need to be reconsidered and modified. This paper explores the historical convergence and divergence in the creation of human and animal research guidelines, as well as opportunities to align ethical frameworks with new scientific discoveries
|Keywords||animal experiments human research animal research research guidelines|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Howard J. Curzer, Gad Perry, Mark C. Wallace & Dan Perry (2016). The Three Rs of Animal Research: What They Mean for the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee and Why. Science and Engineering Ethics 22 (2):549-565.
Similar books and articles
Donald A. Saucier & Mary E. Cain (2006). The Foundations of Attitudes About Animal Research. Ethics and Behavior 16 (2):117 – 133.
Misago Seth & Fredy Saguti (2012). Animal Research Ethics in Africa: Is Tanzania Making Progress? Developing World Bioethics 12 (3):158-162.
Czesław Radzikowski (2006). Protection of Animal Research Subjects. Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (1):103-110.
Robert J. Gatchel, Perry N. Fuchs & Colin Allen (2006). 18 Ethical Issues in Chronic Pain Research. In B. L. Gant & M. E. Schatman (eds.), Ethical Issues in Chronic Pain Management. 295.
Brian Schrag (2004). Commentary on “the Gladiator Sparrow: Ethical Issues in Behavioral Research on Captive Populations of Wild Animals”. Science and Engineering Ethics 10 (4):726-730.
Francine L. Dolins (ed.) (1999). Attitudes to Animals: Views in Animal Welfare. Cambridge University Press.
Rebecca L. Walker (2006). Human and Animal Subjects of Research: The Moral Significance of Respect Versus Welfare. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 27 (4):305-331.
Adil E. Shamoo (2009). Responsible Conduct of Research. Oxford University Press.
Mark Rice (2011). The Institutional Review Board is an Impediment to Human Research: The Result is More Animal-Based Research. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 6 (1):12-.
Kelly Oliver (2010). Animal Ethics: Toward an Ethics of Responsiveness. Research in Phenomenology 40 (2):267-280.
Rebecca Dresser (1988). Standards for Animal Research: Looking at the Middle. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 13 (2):123-143.
John D. Loike Moshe Tendler (2008). Reconstituting a Human Brain in Animals: A Jewish Perspective on Human Sanctity. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 18 (4):pp. 347-367.
John P. Gluck (1997). Harry F. Harlow and Animal Research: Reflection on the Ethical Paradox. Ethics and Behavior 7 (2):149 – 161.
S. F. Sapontzis (1988). On Justifying the Exploitation of Animals in Research. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 13 (2):177-196.
Added to index2011-09-20
Total downloads39 ( #102,436 of 1,792,914 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #464,717 of 1,792,914 )
How can I increase my downloads?