Harms and deprivation of benefits for nonhuman primates in research

Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 35 (2):143-156 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The risks of harm to nonhuman primates, and the absence of benefits for them, are critically important to decisions about nonhuman primate research. Current guidelines for review and practice tend to be permissive for nonhuman primate research as long as minimal welfare requirements are fulfilled and human medical advances are anticipated. This situation is substantially different from human research, in which risks of harms to the individual subject are typically reduced to the extent feasible. A risk threshold is needed for the justification of research on nonhuman primates, comparable to the way risk thresholds are set for vulnerable human subjects who cannot provide informed consent. Much of the laboratory research conducted today has inadequate standards, leading to common physical, psychological, and social harms.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 76,442

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Understanding risks and benefits in research on reproductive genetic technologies.Janet Malek - 2007 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 32 (4):339 – 358.
Non-human primates: the appropriate subjects of biomedical research?M. Quigley - 2007 - Journal of Medical Ethics 33 (11):655-658.
The question of animal culture.Bennett G. Galef - 1992 - Human Nature 3 (2):157-178.
Making Risk-Benefit Assessments of Medical Research Protocols.Alex Rajczi - 2004 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 32 (2):338-348.
Vulnerable Subjects? The Case of Nonhuman Animals in Experimentation.Jane Johnson - 2013 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 10 (4):497-504.
The harm-benefit tradeoff in "bad deal" trials.Gillian Nycum & Lynette Reid - 2007 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 17 (4):321-350.
Primate cognitive neuroscience: What are the useful questions?A. Parker - 1998 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (1):128-128.
A compassionate autonomy alternative to speciesism.Constance K. Perry - 2001 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 22 (3):237-246.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-03-14

Downloads
50 (#237,086)

6 months
1 (#454,876)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

What is it like to be a bat?Thomas Nagel - 1974 - Philosophical Review 83 (October):435-50.
What is it Like to be a Bat?Thomas Nagel - 2003 - In John Heil (ed.), Philosophy of Mind: A Guide and Anthology. Oxford University Press.
Why bioethics needs a concept of vulnerability.Wendy Rogers, Catriona Mackenzie & Susan Dodds - 2012 - International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 5 (2):11-38.
Animal Rights: A Very Short Introduction.David DeGrazia (ed.) - 2002 - Oxford University Press.

View all 7 references / Add more references