Animal Experimentation: Ethics, Alternatives, and Rights

Introduction: Humanity, Nature, and the Roots of the Ethical Crisis

Life on earth depends upon a fragile balance of well-being in the lives of all living things. As humanity became more civilized, technology and research provided people with the means to artificially enhance their own chances of survival. The problem is that this process destroyed the natural balance of life on earth. No longer as susceptible as before to illness and early death, humanity soon became so numerous that the needs of people were superimposed upon the needs of everything else. This fundamental disrespect for all non-human life is the reason for the ecological crisis we are facing today.

Using animals in laboratory experiments in order to enhance the quality of human life is another manifestation of that disrespect. Human beings should therefore re-establish their connection with the natural world and cultivate respect for all life. This is why animals deserve respect. To hurt, cause pain, and even kill animals during laboratory experiments is ethically wrong and should be stopped.

The Scope and Purposes of Animal Laboratory Research

Laboratory animals are used in experiments for a variety of purposes. According to a Current Events special report, 20 million laboratory animals are used in medical experiments every year. These animals are used to find increasingly effective cures for minor ailments such as colds and major pandemics such as AIDS. Some are studied for the purpose of learning more about injuries and how to treat them. Some are even researched for their ability to donate tissue and vital organs to human beings — a concept referred to as "xenotransplantation" (Mani).

According to Mani, xenotransplantation and its research is hardly a novel idea. Experiments to test the medical compatibility of animals with humans began as early as the 17th century. Animal blood, bones, and skin have been taken from a variety of animals — including cats, dogs, primates, and frogs — to save and enhance human lives. The earliest recorded examples of organ transplants from animals to humans occurred in 1905, with kidneys, livers, and hearts transferred from animal to human.

Currently the practice is being researched for its clinical viability (Mani). Success would naturally mean that millions of animals would be bred to meet the enormous demand created by the human lifestyle — a life of suffering for animals bred solely to alleviate human suffering. It is clear why this is not ethically viable.

Arguments For and Against Animal Research

Several arguments are generally made in favor of medical animal research. One of the most prominent is that many fatal and devastating diseases — tuberculosis, polio, diabetes, cystic fibrosis, and smallpox — were brought under control through the sacrifice of animals (Current Events special report). Some scientists even claim that such research benefits animals as well. Antibiotics and surgical techniques developed through animal research are also used in some cases of animal illness. Feline leukemia, rabies, and other animal ailments have benefited from techniques developed in this way. This is a strong claim. Yet it is difficult to justify a lifetime of suffering for millions of animals in order to benefit an already over-populated human species.

The hardest experiments to justify are those aimed at the cosmetic market. Terrible suffering is inflicted upon animals for the sake of creating no-tear shampoos, long-lasting make-up, and skin products. What makes this worse is that these products are often tested and retested on animals despite results having already been obtained. It is therefore little wonder that animal activists have gone as far as destroying research and damaging laboratory equipment in order to free research animals (Current Events special report). While such attacks have been labeled "terrorism," one can understand the reasons for their antagonism, particularly in the case of cosmetic research.

In terms of cosmetic research, very little can be said in its support. It is clear that alternative methods exist for testing and researching these products. Any well-stocked supermarket offers numerous beauty alternatives that have not been tested on animals. Indeed, there has been a marked decline in laboratory animal research as a result of alternative method development. Computer programs, mechanical models, and human tissue cultures have taken the place of animals in such research (Current Events special report). The same transition is occurring in medical research.

Scientists do not, however, agree with animal rights activists on how frequently alternatives should replace live animals. Researchers claim that animals are often the best indicator of certain results. Animal rights activists, on the other hand, view this as a lack of effort on the part of scientists to actively develop more effective alternatives. Economically, the funding directed toward animal research could be redirected to other, more productive and equally worthy areas of medical research, according to the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.

Another strong argument in favor of alternatives is that live animals, no matter how genetically similar to human beings, simply do not respond to drug treatments and other procedures in the same way humans do. More accurate results, it is argued, would be derived from simulations rather than from live animals. Animal research is therefore not only unethical — it is also scientifically flawed. This is a view increasingly accepted not only by the general population but also by the scientific community. Because of the many inaccuracies and inconsistencies found in animal research, along with increased public pressure, scientists have progressively shifted their research paradigm toward approaches that benefit not only human life but all life.

Conclusion: Toward a More Humane Future

While the declines in medical and cosmetic animal research are encouraging, I believe that at its current state, humanity should be sufficiently enlightened to eradicate this practice altogether. After millions of years of evolution, it should be clear that no form of life should be deprived of its right to survival for the benefit of another species without at least the possibility of choice or escape. Using caged animals in laboratory experimentation is cruel and disrespectful of life — on the same level as destroying millions of acres of rainforest every year.