Contesting Animal Experiments through Ethics and Epistemology: In Defense of a Political Critique of Animal Experimentation

Arianna Ferrari
{"title":"Contesting Animal Experiments through Ethics and Epistemology: In Defense of a Political Critique of Animal Experimentation","authors":"Arianna Ferrari","doi":"10.1163/9789004391192_008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Generally, an animal experiment can be defined as an intervention on an animal, which causes suffering, harm, and distress, for scientific purposes. In this definition, animal experiments differ from more general scientific inves­ tigations concerning animals, such as observational studies in the wild in the fields of ethology or conservation, in which animals are involved but may not be harmed. Nowadays, the use of the term vivisection, in the case of animal ex­ periments, is very controversial. This term originally referred to the cutting of living bodies for scientific purposes and has a long conceptual history (Maehle, 1992 ). In ancient times, it was used for referring to experiments on animals as well as on humans. Only in modern times, it became a colloquial term for all animal experiments and was much used by opponents in the nineteenth century, as the criticism of animal experiments became organized in a politi­ cal movement (Maehle, 1990 ). Many opponents to animal experiments, nowa­ days, use the term deliberately in a political sense, connecting to past animal protection movements ( e.g., the international Citizens' Initiative Stop Vivisec­ tion, cf. Rippe, 2009 ). Animal experimenters, on the other hand, oppose the term on the grounds that there is no chirurgical exploration of living animals in experiments ( e.g., German Research Foundation, DFG, 2016). Currently, animals are used in different ways for scientific purposes: they are used in basic research; in education in a variety of biomedical disciplines, including veterinary medicine; as so-called disease models, to mimic different diseases, mostly human ones; as test subjects in different test settings; in vet­ erinary medicine; in behavioral and cognitive ethological studies; as bioreac­ tors to produce fluids or bodily parts which contain therapeutic substances for human beings (i.e., \"gene-pharming\"); and as sources of cells, tissues, and","PeriodicalId":138056,"journal":{"name":"Animal Experimentation: Working Towards a Paradigm Change","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Animal Experimentation: Working Towards a Paradigm Change","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004391192_008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Generally, an animal experiment can be defined as an intervention on an animal, which causes suffering, harm, and distress, for scientific purposes. In this definition, animal experiments differ from more general scientific inves­ tigations concerning animals, such as observational studies in the wild in the fields of ethology or conservation, in which animals are involved but may not be harmed. Nowadays, the use of the term vivisection, in the case of animal ex­ periments, is very controversial. This term originally referred to the cutting of living bodies for scientific purposes and has a long conceptual history (Maehle, 1992 ). In ancient times, it was used for referring to experiments on animals as well as on humans. Only in modern times, it became a colloquial term for all animal experiments and was much used by opponents in the nineteenth century, as the criticism of animal experiments became organized in a politi­ cal movement (Maehle, 1990 ). Many opponents to animal experiments, nowa­ days, use the term deliberately in a political sense, connecting to past animal protection movements ( e.g., the international Citizens' Initiative Stop Vivisec­ tion, cf. Rippe, 2009 ). Animal experimenters, on the other hand, oppose the term on the grounds that there is no chirurgical exploration of living animals in experiments ( e.g., German Research Foundation, DFG, 2016). Currently, animals are used in different ways for scientific purposes: they are used in basic research; in education in a variety of biomedical disciplines, including veterinary medicine; as so-called disease models, to mimic different diseases, mostly human ones; as test subjects in different test settings; in vet­ erinary medicine; in behavioral and cognitive ethological studies; as bioreac­ tors to produce fluids or bodily parts which contain therapeutic substances for human beings (i.e., "gene-pharming"); and as sources of cells, tissues, and
通过伦理和认识论争论动物实验:为动物实验的政治批判辩护
一般来说,动物实验可以被定义为为了科学目的对动物进行干预,使其遭受痛苦、伤害和痛苦。在这一定义中,动物实验不同于更一般的科学研究——对动物的研究,如动物行为学或动物保护领域的野外观察研究,在这些研究中,动物参与但可能不会受到伤害。现在,在动物实验中使用活体解剖这个术语是很有争议的。这个术语最初指的是为了科学目的而切割活体,并且有很长的概念历史(Maehle, 1992)。在古代,它指的是在动物身上做的实验,也指在人身上做的实验。只有在现代,它才成为所有动物实验的口语化术语,并在19世纪被反对者大量使用,因为对动物实验的批评成为一种政治运动(Maehle, 1990)。如今,许多反对动物实验的人故意在政治意义上使用这个术语,将其与过去的动物保护运动联系起来(例如,国际公民倡议停止活体解剖,参见Rippe, 2009)。另一方面,动物实验者反对这个术语,理由是在实验中没有对活体动物进行外科探索(例如,德国研究基金会,DFG, 2016)。目前,动物被用于不同的科学目的:它们被用于基础研究;在各种生物医学学科的教育中,包括兽医学;作为所谓的疾病模型,模拟不同的疾病,主要是人类疾病;作为不同测试环境下的测试对象;兽医医学;行为学和认知行为学研究;作为生物反应器——生产含有人类治疗物质的液体或身体部位(即“基因植入”);作为细胞,组织,和
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信