Animal Experimentation: Working Towards a Paradigm Change最新文献

{"title":"Beyond Plausibility Checks: A Case for Moral Doubt in Review Processes of Animal Experimentation","authors":"M. Cojocaru, Philipp von Gall","doi":"10.1163/9789004391192_013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004391192_013","url":null,"abstract":"The fact that countries all over the world continue to develop new regula­ tions for experimentation on non-human animals testament that this prac­ tice raises many doubts. Our aim in this chapter is to show that one important type of doubt should receive more attention: a particular type of moral doubt that could play a pivotal role in the ethical review of animal experiments. We assume that there are a range of emotions that indicate morally complex or problematic situations. When one or all of these emotions are experienced, we say that someone is experiencing moral doubt. To illustrate this point, we introduce the concept of moral doubt in the context of review processes, as they are legally required in the European Union (Eu). Independent evaluation committees review animal research proposals to advise competent authorities whether applications for animal experiments comply with the legal standards. We chose the case of Germany as an example to explain what these commit­ tees decide upon and the degree to which their decisions may be influenced by emotions. We develop the argument that acknowledging emotional moral doubt throughout the review process, in specific ways, may have the positive effect of fostering paradigm change in animal experimentation, as envisioned in Directive 2010/63/EU (European Parliament, 2010 ).","PeriodicalId":138056,"journal":{"name":"Animal Experimentation: Working Towards a Paradigm Change","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131372507","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Disease Prevention with a Plant-based Lifestyle","authors":"S. Vyas","doi":"10.1163/9789004391192_005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004391192_005","url":null,"abstract":"Animal experiments are commonly conducted to understand human diseases and responses to treatment. As decades of research indicate, the use of non­ human animals (hereinafter referred to as animals) to translate the side effects, benefits, and impact of medications and treatments on the human body has been demonstrated to be ineffective; while billions of animals and humans have suffered (Shanks, Greek and Greek, 2009). Due to misleading safety and efficacy data from animal experiments, humans are often prescribed medica­ tions that may not be as effective or as safe as the patient, or even physician, may have been led to believe (Akhtar, 2015). In the United States alone, over 820,000 animals were used for research in 2016. This number does not include many species, including mice, rats and aquatic animals, under the Animal Welfare Act (United States Department of Agriculture, USDA, 2017 ). It is estimated that up to 100 million mice and rats are used for research purposes in the us each year (Carbone, 2004). A number of species of farm animals are also used in research for the purpose of enhancing the agricultural industry. However, from an ethical standpoint, experimenting on animals subjects them to cruelty, costs billions of dollars a year, and of­ ten does not provide sufficient results to ensure human safety (Akhtar, 2015). A major reason that animal studies are ineffective is that human bodies are very different physiologically from other animals, including the way we develop dis­ eases and how we absorb nutrients. Many advances have been made to create alternatives to animal testing, which are being adopted by scientists interested in innovative methods in research; and, yet, the use of animals for therapeutic testing is on the rise. To attain more accurate data regarding human health, there are no substitutes for human populationand clinical studies, particular­ ly for lifestyle-related diseases, which may not be relevant to non-humans. This chapter addresses how we can make decisions towards disease prevention and reduce the demand for prescription drugs and, in turn, reduce animal research and testing, through the adoption of a whole foods, plant-based diet, which has","PeriodicalId":138056,"journal":{"name":"Animal Experimentation: Working Towards a Paradigm Change","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123917257","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Human Wrongs in Animal Research: A Focus on Moral Injury and Reification","authors":"Jane Johnson, A. Smajdor","doi":"10.1163/9789004391192_014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004391192_014","url":null,"abstract":"Most research on non-human animals (hereinafter referred to as animals) in­ volves clear harms for the animals used, either as a direct result of research protocols or by virtue of the conditions under which the animals are kept. Ar­ guably, however, although these harms are widely acknowledged, they have not motivated significant change to the practice of animal research. In this chapter, we focus on the damage to humans that can result from animal ex­ perimentation and how this may act as an alternative driver of change. Humans employed in animal research, whether inside animal housing or the laboratory, confront significant stress as a result of what they routinely do as part of their job, as well as by virtue of how that work is received by \"outsid­ ers\" to animal research. These workplace stressors can result in physical and psychological harms. It is well known that human patients may also be harmed as a consequence of the epistemological shortcomings of research undertaken on animals, which fails to translate to human clinical settings. Whilst we will briefly discuss these kinds of physical and psychological harms, our primary focus is the moral injury that can result from the practice of animal research. Moral injury occurs when a disregard of someone's well-being causes them harm. Typically, this is understood to encompass the kind of moral wrong that may arise from systematic injustices or from criminal or violent acts. However, moral injury is increasingly recognized as a problem for the perpetrators as well as the victims of certain acts. Moral injury, thus, also occurs when a person","PeriodicalId":138056,"journal":{"name":"Animal Experimentation: Working Towards a Paradigm Change","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129501329","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Political Campaigning: Where Scientific and Ethical Arguments Meet Public Policy","authors":"E. McIvor","doi":"10.1163/9789004391192_006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004391192_006","url":null,"abstract":"The ambition of the paradigm shift we seek is vast, and the obstacles we face are intractable. For anyone opposing the use of non-human animals (herein­ after referred to as animals) in research and testing, the story has been the same from the start. Legitimate concern for animals has been all-too-easily dismissed as misguided sentimentality, and powerful vested interests have claimed scientific, economic, and moral superiority. But the ground is shifting. Animal researchers accept the need to provide scientific justification for their choices, and the protection of animals is increasingly recognized as a public good. Concern among citizens has been translated into hard-and-fast rules, and scientific advances have added weight to the growing demand for change. In deciding how best to achieve the paradigm shift, the question for animal advocates is how to create the greatest change in the shortest time possible. This chapter deals with political campaigning at the European Union (Eu) level, since the adoption of the first Eu Directive on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes, and focuses on the main political developments of the past two decades. Historically, much was made of a perceived choice between presenting ethical or scientific arguments; both are powerful drivers, providing evidence that existing practice is flawed. Other chapters in this Vol­ ume describe aspects of those approaches in detail; similarly, the question of whether to focus on the 3Rs or replacement only is also covered elsewhere. In this chapter, a pragmatic policy focus is necessary to explore how scientific and ethical objectives can be pursued in order to move forward in the politi­ cal arena, making full use of existing structures and creating new opportuni­ ties. The stakes are high. Our vision requires a revolution in science and in the way animals are treated. Twenty-first century technology should not depend on inhumane practices, just as modern economies should not depend on the destruction of the environment or the exploitation of workers.","PeriodicalId":138056,"journal":{"name":"Animal Experimentation: Working Towards a Paradigm Change","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127753767","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"How to Evaluate the Science of Non-human Animal Use in Biomedical Research and Testing: A Proposed Format for Debate","authors":"R. Greek, Lisa A. Kramer","doi":"10.1163/9789004391192_003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004391192_003","url":null,"abstract":"Over time, the interpretation of science has occasionally been corrupted by vested interest groups, be they financially motivated or ego driven. Scientific consensus and widespread public beliefs usually catch up with the evidence, but this can take a very long time and often costs lives. The use of non-human animals in biomedical research and testing is a scientific endeavor and, as such, can and should be evaluated in light of the best science currently available. But facts that have been accepted in all areas of science are routinely ignored or called into question by well-funded, vested interest groups, compromising the scientific integrity of biomedical research. History is replete with examples of practices deemed scientifically viable in one era, but later abandoned as more facts about the material universe were discovered. There are also many instances of practices being rejected by the scientific establishment, in spite of the fact that they were valid based on scientific criteria. In this chapter, we discuss why science is important in the context of animal modeling, how sci­ entific positions are currently evaluated through the peer-review process, and how an evaluation of the science of animal modeling should be conducted now. We reach the conclusion that, in order to formally evaluate the scientific viability of animal modeling, a debate is urgently needed with experts in the relevant fields of science reviewing pro and con arguments written in position papers.","PeriodicalId":138056,"journal":{"name":"Animal Experimentation: Working Towards a Paradigm Change","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131795517","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Replacing Animal Tests to Improve Safety for Humans","authors":"Kathy Archibald, Robert Coleman, T. Drake","doi":"10.1163/9789004391192_019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004391192_019","url":null,"abstract":"Animal safety testing for new medicines is arguably the most difficult use of non-human animals (hereinafter referred to as animals) to challenge, for two reasons: first, it is required by governments (regulatory testing); second, pro­ tecting patients is a vital goal, and it seems intuitively obvious that animal tests must protect patients. Animal testing became institutionalized in the mid twentieth century (Parke, 1994) in response to early drug disasters, with the aim of preventing further tragedies. However, even the laudable aim of protecting patients cannot justify animal testing, unless it is the most effec­ tive means to ensure the safety of medicines. European Union (EU) law (Euro­ pean Parliament, 2010, Directive 2010/63/EU) states that animals must not be used if a non-animal method could achieve the same purpose. So, it is crucial to know how well animal tests predict the safety of medicines, and whether any other methods are equally or more predictive. In addition to the question of predictive value, other important issues must also be taken into consider­ ation, including the efficiency of different methods in terms of time and costs; and the ethical acceptability of using animals, if their use is deemed to be of irreplaceable value. The issue of whether animals should be used as human surrogates for safety testing is highly contentious; individual views range from no use of animals","PeriodicalId":138056,"journal":{"name":"Animal Experimentation: Working Towards a Paradigm Change","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133328403","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Animal Research for Alzheimer Disease: Failures of Science and Ethics","authors":"J. Pippin, Sarah E. Cavanaugh, F. Pistollato","doi":"10.1163/9789004391192_021","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004391192_021","url":null,"abstract":"Perhaps the most impactful and foreboding development in chronic diseas­ es in recent decades has been the increasing prevalence and awareness of dementia. The various dementias, especially Alzheimer disease (AD), have de­ railed and ended the lives of tens of millions in America and worldwide. It is a truism that AD patients die twice. First the mind dies, and only later does the body. AD uniquely and unremittingly affects not only patients, but their families, caregivers, and communities. In recent years, AD may have displaced cancer as the most feared disease among Americans. As with other diseases that have no meaningful methods for prevention and treatment, research tar­ geting AD has primarily focused on preclinical approaches, predominantly us­ ing animals. Nonetheless, decades of animal research have failed to translate into significant advances in the prevention or treatment of AD. In view of this failure, a different and human-relevant approach is critically needed.","PeriodicalId":138056,"journal":{"name":"Animal Experimentation: Working Towards a Paradigm Change","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122216337","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Changing Paradigm in Preclinical Toxicology: in vitro and in silico Methods in Liver Toxicity Evaluations","authors":"F. Noor","doi":"10.1163/9789004391192_026","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004391192_026","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":138056,"journal":{"name":"Animal Experimentation: Working Towards a Paradigm Change","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121124277","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Research and Testing Without Animals: Where Are We Now and Where Are We Heading?","authors":"T. Hartung","doi":"10.1163/9789004391192_029","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004391192_029","url":null,"abstract":"Experiments involving non-human animals (hereinafter referred to as animals) were the predominant technology in the life sciences from the 1920s to the 1970s. Increasingly, animal-based procedures have been complemented and superseded by other approaches; yet, they still have an enormous reputation as an apparent definitive answer to many scientific and, especially, regulatory questions. They have been questioned first for ethical reasons: Can we justify making animals suffer for scientific inquiry? Simply said, people have different views on this question, but the general public views animal experimentation more and more critically. The animal research community has sought a com­ promise between those who would like to see the end to the use of animals sooner rather than later, and those who think animal research is indispensable. The societal response has included regulation and oversight of animal experi­ ments ( e.g., requiring formal justifications and permission), as well as support for the development of alternative methods.","PeriodicalId":138056,"journal":{"name":"Animal Experimentation: Working Towards a Paradigm Change","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126164946","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Humane Education: The Tool for Scientific Revolution in Brazil","authors":"V. Bones, Rita Garcia, G. Alves, R. L. Paixão, A. A. Rocha, Karynn Capilé, R. Bachinski","doi":"10.1163/9789004391192_024","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004391192_024","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":138056,"journal":{"name":"Animal Experimentation: Working Towards a Paradigm Change","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116811607","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}