David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
BMC Medical Ethics 13 (1):16- (2012)
Background: The requirement that animals be used in research and testing in order to protect humans was formalized in the Nuremberg Code and subsequent national and international laws, codes, and declarations.DiscussionWe review the history of these requirements and contrast what was known via science about animal models then with what is known now. We further analyze the predictive value of animal models when used as test subjects for human response to drugs and disease. We explore the use of animals for models in toxicity testing as an example of the problem with using animal models.SummaryWe conclude that the requirements for animal testing found in the Nuremberg Code were based on scientifically outdated principles, compromised by people with a vested interest in animal experimentation, serve no useful function, increase the cost of drug development, and prevent otherwise safe and efficacious drugs and therapies from being implemented
|Keywords||Animal Biological complexity Ethics Evolution Law Nuremberg code Species variation|
|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
Ray Greek & Jean Greek (2010). Is the Use of Sentient Animals in Basic Research Justifiable? Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 5 (1):14.
Hugh LaFollette & Niall Shanks (1994). Animal Experimentation: The Legacy of Claude Bernard. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 8 (3):195 – 210.
Niall Shanks, Ray Greek & Jean Greek (2009). Are Animal Models Predictive for Humans? Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 4 (1):2.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
C. Degeling & J. Johnson (2013). Evaluating Animal Models: Some Taxonomic Worries. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 38 (2):91-106.
Hope Ferdowsian (2011). Human and Animal Research Guidelines: Aligning Ethical Constructs with New Scientific Developments. Bioethics 25 (8):472-478.
David J. Mellor (2009). The Sciences of Animal Welfare. Wiley-Blackwell.
Hans-Martin Sass (1983). Reichsrundschreiben 1931: Pre-Nuremberg German Regulations Concerning New Therapy and Human Experimentation. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 8 (2):99-112.
Misago Seth & Fredy Saguti (2012). Animal Research Ethics in Africa: Is Tanzania Making Progress? Developing World Bioethics 12 (3):158-162.
Aysha Akhtar (2012). Animals and Public Health: Why Treating Animals Better is Critical to Human Welfare. Palgrave Macmillan.
Kelly Oliver (2010). Animal Ethics: Toward an Ethics of Responsiveness. Research in Phenomenology 40 (2):267-280.
Joel Marks (2010). Innocent and Innocuous: The Case Against Animal Research. Between the Species (10):98-117.
Dennis V. Parke (1995). Ethical Aspects of the Safety of Medicines and Other Social Chemicals. Science and Engineering Ethics 1 (3):283-298.
Richard Twine (2010). Animals as Biotechnology: Ethics, Sustainability, and Critical Animal Studies. Earthscan.
Claire Molloy (2011). Popular Media and Animals. Palgrave Macmillan.
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-.
Added to index2012-07-09
Total downloads16 ( #113,758 of 1,413,407 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #154,345 of 1,413,407 )
How can I increase my downloads?