The Morality of Animal Study (Vivisection) Reflections From A Medical Researcher When individuals argue over the use

e of animals in research, also called vivisection, you will find those that defend the animals and those who defend the study. The animal defenders point out the obvious suffering that researchers frequently inflict on animals, and contend that this cruelty is morally unjustifiable. They further argue that you cant necessarily predict human responses on the basis of animal studies, which makes the very best animal model no much more than an unreliable analogy to human function. Lastly, they encourage the replacement of animal testing with non-animal study methods. In short, this group would say animal study is inaccurate, unnecessary, and cruel. On the other side are the researchers who use animals and contend that such research is essential for science to progress and help cure disease. They assure the public that they're doing all that they can to decrease animal suffering, so lengthy as its avoidable. And they firmly assert that, whilst they recognize the limitations of animal models, theres no much better alternative. They insist that with regards to fighting disease, its better to initial test drugs and treatments on an animal, such as a dog, than on a human, like your child. In brief, this group would say animal study is minimally cruel, important for progress in medicine and may save human lives. Which position is correct? The answer depends on your state of mind. I was trained in biochemistry and human medicine. In each these fields animal study will be the standard, and also the outcomes of animal studies constitute the bulk of medical understanding. I would have at 1 time defended animal study, because I had been told over and over by my professors, who were themselves animal researchers, how animal experiments saves human lives. If the ends justify the indicates, they explained, then killing dogs to save children is acceptable and necessary, even if its distasteful. Following all, we're dealing with human life and death. Animal sacrifice was a essential evil. But all through my training and research, my soul silently wept every time an animal was sacrificed on the alter of medicine. How could a healing profession, presumably dedicated to ending human suffering, promote a methodology that causes animal suffering? Can we trust a well being care program to treat us with compassion when it shows none for helpless, innocent creatures? Ultimately, I realized the essence of the animal study issue. Medicine is really a various field from any other because it deals with life and death. When people are suffering you will find extreme feelings of urgency and anxiety which may result in extreme conclusions of whats right and wrong. Nevertheless, the ethics one utilizes for life and death decisions arent regular, everyday moral judgments. They are lifeboat ethics. And also the conclusions you come up with on a lifeboat are not normal conclusions. The classic example of lifeboat ethics is which you are on a boat with other

people, presumably the survivors of an ocean mishap, and there is the require for some people to be sacrificed to save the others. For instance, lets say the boat can only hold 3 individuals without sinking, and you will find 4 individuals on board. Lifeboat ethics asks how to decide on who should be thrown overboard to save the others. As another example, we have all heard of airplane crash survivors having to resort to cannibalism to steer clear of starving to death. For someone contemplating this lifeboat situation, the problem is not whether or not someone ought to to be eaten, but who should be eaten. In general terms, lifeboat ethics addresses decisions of who should be helped and who ought to be harmed. The belief in impending disaster unless somebody is sacrificed to save the other people is really a basic assumption of lifeboat ethics. Of course, if people can resort to cannibalism when faced having a life and death situation, then they will have no problem killing animals if it means saving themselves from some dreadful illness. As soon as they think their lives are on the line, that they are in a lifeboat situation, then they are mentally prepared to make sacrifices in the name of survival. Animal researchers, who're the captains of this disease lifeboat, provide animal sacrifices as a substitute for human ones. But is this truly a lifeboat situation? We all face the possibility of illness and death every day as part of the normal risks of life. Is it right to call life itself a lifeboat scenario? The answer to this depends upon whos answering. Fearful, negative, pessimistic people see life as a lifeboat struggle against disease and death. Cheerful, positive, optimistic individuals sees life as justlife. Those within the medical study and therapy company profit most when people are fearful, anxious, and desperate. Animal researchers arguing that it is a dog or your child are selling with fear. The medical/ pharmaceutical industry uses fear to help keep people addicted to physicians and medication, willing to obey medical authority and accept its practices, such as the use of animals in study. Fearful, desperate individuals agree to whatever the price, financially and morally. Whenever you are sold on the belief which you are in a lifeboat, you would like salvation at any cost. Meanwhile, people are kept ignorant about how their bodies work and how you can stop illness, because ignorance keeps individuals fearful, mystified, and sick. Fortunately, not everybody sees life in such emergency terms. And that is a good factor, because lifeboat ethics are a suspension of regular, decent, moral behavior. Desperate individuals are hazardous. They are willing to kill if it indicates you or them. We dont want a society with everyone running around feeling that way. If you are not fearful towards the point of becoming able to justify killing, then animal study will clearly appear morally wrong. Anyone with any sensitivity who has ever befriended a dog, cat, bird, mouse, or even a rat will understand that animals have feelings and can experience suffering. To any mentally healthy person, it is wrong to cause other people to suffer. It shouldnt matter what species they are. Obviously, this assumes which you are not in a fearful panic, willing to do anything, even kill, if it meant saving your self. If we can all be decent human beings with some compassion for other creatures, then of course we ought to be using non-animal

research techniques. Animal study is only regarded as a standard because it has been historically used as one. Its imperfect at best. And one of its greatest shortcomings is that it blinds us towards the actual trigger of disease, which has nothing to do with animals and every thing to do with being human. For years the World Health Organization has been saying that the greatest cause of disease and death in modern times is our lifestyle. This indicates our way of life and also the culture that defines it are making us sick. Obviously, you cannot model human culture in animals. Its a human phenomenon. Clearly, we can learn more about our issues by studying ourselves. By addressing our exposure to tension, chemical pollution, a toxic diet plan, legal and illegal drugs, alcohol, tobacco, tight clothing, electromagnetic radiation, and innumerable other cultural factors that make us sick, we can better control our well being and stay off the illness lifeboat. We could stop illness by taking responsibility for living healthfully, instead of feeling desperate and performing anything, even generating a deal with the devil, to find a cure. I left medicine to dedicate my life to the search for human way of life solutions to human health issues. I appear in the way we treat ourselves, the environment, and the creatures with whom we share the planet. And it is clear that we live in a sick culture. We are our own worst enemy. And the only sacrifice we need to make is to be willing to give up our damaging lifestyles. We can then lead healthy and happy lives as Nature intended, even as we approach old age and, ultimately, death. For those that are cheerful, positive, and optimistic, it is all good. Life does not need to really feel like a lifeboat. But if it does to some fearful people, then that is their issue. It provides them no moral right to sacrifice others, human or animal, as they act out their individual lifeboat nightmares. anime