Quantcast
Animal Rights

Who in Their Right Mind Would Support Animal Research?

After reading some of the opinion pieces posted here by opponents of animal research I am sure some readers may be asking themselves:

Who in their right mind would support the use of animals in biomedical research?

Please count with me...

The American Academy of Neurology says that

“In recognition of the need for the appropriate and humane use of animals in research, and in response to the growing pressure from other organizations that would deny Americans the health benefits evolving from animal research, the American Academy of Neurology, as a professional society including basic and clinical researchers and caregivers, endorses and supports the appropriate and responsible use of animals as experimental subjects.”

The American Veterinary Medical Association states that the organization

“[...] recognizes that animals play a central and essential role in research, testing, and education for continued improvement in the health and welfare of human beings and animals. The AVMA also recognizes that humane care of animals used in research, testing, and education is an integral part of those activities.”

The American Heart Association says that

“We support the continued responsible use of animals in biomedical research. Effectively preventing and treating disease depends on accurate knowledge about its causes, on how disease affects the body, on drugs that combat disease, on devices that work, and on operations that cure.”

The Society for Neuroscience explans that

“Knowledge generated by neuroscience research on animals has led to important advances in the understanding of diseases and disorders that affect the nervous system and in the development of better treatments that reduce suffering in humans and animals. This knowledge also makes a critical contribution to our understanding of ourselves, the complexities of our brains and what makes us human. Continued progress in understanding how the brain works and further advances in treating and curing disorders of the nervous system require investigation of complex functions at all levels in the living nervous system. Because no adequate alternatives exist, much of this research must be done on animal subjects. The Society takes the position that neuroscientists have an obligation to contribute to this progress through responsible and humane research on animals.”

The constituent members of the largest experimental biology society in the country, the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, stated that

“The Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB) affirms the essential contribution of animals in research and education aimed at improving the health of both humans and animals. The role of animals remains critical in understanding the fundamental processes of life, and in developing treatments for injury and disease. [....]

In supporting these principles, it becomes the responsibility of the members of the Constituent Societies of FASEB to educate the public about the role of animals in understanding life processes and disease, and their vital contribution to human and animal health.”

Of course, I already pointed out that the American Medical Association,  has strong statements in support of animal research:

H-460.974 Animal Research/Rights

The AMA (1) reaffirms its commitment to public education by encouraging physicians to place copies of material describing the medical benefits of animal research in their office waiting rooms; (2) supports heightened public awareness and education with regard to the types of animal models employed in research and efforts employed to avoid animal suffering; and (3) stresses to the public its concern with regard to the impact of the animal rights movement on the conduct of biomedical research, as well as support for the proper and humane treatment of animals in research.

H-460.988 Need for Continued Use of Animals in Research and Education

The AMA supports (1) the humane use of animals essential to research, education and the development of drugs and medical devices; and (2) efforts to assure the availability of animals for these purposes.

H-460.989 Animals as Experimental Subjects

The AMA encourages medical school faculty who use animals in the education of students to continue instruction of students on the appropriate use and treatment of animals.
So the answer is many in their right mind will support the responsible use of animals in research to further our knowledge and advance medical science.

Thus, the answer is that many in their right mind supports animal research.  Why?   Because, as Dr. Weinberg already summarized:

“If the American people wish to support Dr Greek's agenda, then they must at the same time give up the hope that future biomedical research will improve the powers of medicine to treat and cure disease -- it's as simple as that."

Yes, it is as simple as that.

Get More:

Comments

Jean-claude's picture

.

I despise animal testing and the things it does. that is MURDER. we should really put a stop to it.

SolarSanitizer's picture

Animals are not people.

"In Germany the term Mord (murder) is officially used for the intentional killing of another person, but only if the case is especially severe. The requirements can be read in § 211 of the German Criminal Code, Strafgesetzbuch (StGB).
The murderer shall be punished with imprisonment for life.
A murderer is, whoever kills a human being out of
murderous lust, to satisfy his sexual desires, from greed or otherwise base motives,
treacherously (other translation: by stealth) or cruelly or with means dangerous to the public or
in order to commit or to cover up another crime .
—German criminal law, Strafgesetzbuch (StGB), § 211 StGB."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_ (German_law)

The Democratic National Committee approves of this website.

Jean-claude's picture

..

I understand what murder is...i don't need a definition..oh, and I'm NOT german

SolarSanitizer's picture

My point is:

If it is an animal being killed, not a human, how can you call it murder?

Is that not a German flag next to your name? If not, what nation does it represent?

The Democratic National Committee approves of this website.

Jean-claude's picture

are you tryin to pick a fight:/

do you support animal testing? let me give you the definition of murder.."to kill or slaughter inhumanly or barbarously." it does not only mean humans. it means with other things too. oh, and, I have the AMERICAN flag. You should go to the eye doctor and check your eyes.

SolarSanitizer's picture

I see that it is now the American flag

I also know what I saw. That you changed it and are now pretending that I somehow mistook my flag for the black-orange-yellow horizontal striped German flag is pedantic. That tells me much about you.

I am not trying to pick a fight, I am explaining to you why your position is wrong. Murder is reserved for humans, not lab rats. You are free to equate yourself with lesser beings, if that tickles your fancy, but don't think for a second that others will cosign your bullshite.

Animal testing is vital to the scientific and medical advancement our civilization needs to make progress. Is it pretty? NO! But neither is the butcher shop floor... But we all love a good hamburger.

The Democratic National Committee approves of this website.

Benito2961's picture

Hey

Animal testing is not nice. Eben thought we are human and have the right to speak out does not mean you need to critisize other. If animals were to speak then what?

Jean-claude's picture

:O

He didn't calll you an idiot, benito :/

Jean-claude's picture

XD

awww. little benito:)

SolarSanitizer's picture

No, it is not nice.

I agree.

But neither is slowly dying of leprosy, or anaphylactic shock, or any manner of preventable horrible death or suffering.

It is in the best interest of the human race to consume animals in all manner of ways. Be it eating them, wearing their products, or testing treatments/products on them.

If animals were to speak, I'd have them tell the curable sick and dying why they were more important than that person. I sure wouldn't want to.

The Democratic National Committee approves of this website.

Jean-claude's picture

woah woah....

hold on...YOU ARE trying to pick up a fight. well, I respect your decision about supporting animal testing. I won't fight like you are to change your ways. And I"M trying to tell you that YOUR position is wrong. However, I'm not that much of an asshole to go picking fights with people I don't know. Oh, and I am American. I just felt like putting a German flag
True, I do love hamburgers.

SolarSanitizer's picture

One cannot murder an animal.

It isn't possible.

Kill, sure, but murder? That is the only part of your position/opinion I challenged, by the way. If you want, I can link you to the statute describing the crime of murder to prove my point.

As for animal testing, you oppose it, I support it. I am not telling you why you are wrong to oppose it because it is a choice you made. Since it was your choice, it is your truth. It is a position one can take, and I respect it just like you respect the position I take. The choice is not a matter of facts or constants, it is a matter of personal values.

However, when you bring in the legal term: murder, you change that. Murder is finite, well defined and supported by millennia of foreign laws and hundreds of years of domestic jurisprudence. It is not a matter of choice or values, it is concrete and written into the foundation of our society.

You cannot possibly murder an animal. But if you want to fight about the definition of murder in America, you'll be fighting by yourself.

The Democratic National Committee approves of this website.

Jean-claude's picture

alright, alright

I see what your trying to say. and I get your point and definition of murder, I just thought that it meant the killing of anything that moves and walks

SolarSanitizer's picture

Its all good.

I am happy to have done my part to help us stop fighting about this sensitive argument and am happy for you that you did yours.

Yours is a valid argument and gets a little stronger every time you refine some of the raw emotion and hyperbole out of it.

Take care.

The Democratic National Committee approves of this website.

Jean-claude's picture

yeah:)

Yes, I'm glad that we are not fighting anymore.

I understand your point of view and I'm totally fine with it. well, I guess all that theres left to say is that you have a great day and keep fighting for what you think is right.

Jean-claude's picture

-_-

and your point?

indycar01's picture

your charity funds animal research

visit, animal research: it doesnt work, page2.

AnimaliaLibero's picture

This should have said...

You could have had a much shorter article if you would have just written:

The following groups, who would lose lots of money if animal research ceased to exist, have this to say about it so they can keep getting paid.

Since you keep bringin up Dr. Greek and his "agenda", why are you so afraid to debate him?

topapito's picture

Testing on animals?

Sure, treat them right and test away. But here's a novel thought, testing on felons convicted of violent crimes. Just kidding... NOT!
Imagine the reduction in crime then! Talk about deterrent.

In any case, I will support anything that furthers the advancement in medicine . Even human volunteers. I can see the benefit for terminally ill patients to offer themselves as test subjects. But animals is definitely ok.

Jean-claude's picture

no

testing on animals is NOT ok.

ecuadmail's picture

Why not?

Would you then suggest testing on Felons as topapito did?

If there are other better ways please enlighten us.

If there aren't take off your makeup. (They test that on animals too. Cute little squirrels with mascara :D )

thebigmike's picture

So what?

I personally see nothing wrong with animal research , but I do have a problem with this article: it's an appeal to authority. The organizations mentioned are not chiefly concerned with the subject at hand , ethics . Moreover, these organizations all benefit from having that opinion, as it aids their research . It would say something if they were against animal testing , but no one should be any more surprised at this than they would be at finding petroleum groups are in favor of more drilling .

Jean-claude's picture

um...

well, actually there IS something wrong with animal testing. I respect your decision, but please take a look at this website.

Jean-claude's picture

.

wolverinaworld.blogspot.com

this is the website..if it doesnt appear..then, look up a website of animal testing

kong99's picture

Of course

Most people cringe when they see the methods being used on animals for research . I saw a video of a monkey with half it's skull removed with an attachment to it's brain...and he was awake and functioning. It's hard to watch if you love animals.

At the same time, we can't let that emotion stand in the way of medical research. I want it to be done as humane as possible, though.

We can't start testing with humans, obviously. Tests that are being done with humans are with emperimental drugs and it's volunteer. Previous tests were already done with animals to try to ensure the safety of a human being taking the drug. Take away the animals and you will have nothing to do the initial tests with. No tests, no drugs .

Rice klowN's picture

Agreed, every word of it

"We can't start testing with humans, obviously."

You might be shocked, or not, to learn that that bit of obviousness (to you and I) isn't clearly seen by even some of our OV.com brethren.

I have actually seen first test human trials advocated on this very website by followers of Dr. Greek.

kong99's picture

Even if that were legal...

...any drug company that did that would be complete idiots. Drugs go through rigorous tests well before it ever gets to a human being, and tens of millions of dollars are spent before the drug ever hits the market. Most drugs don't make it, so the ones that do have to make up the cost of the failed drugs . I think I remember reading that it costs over $80 million do get a drug on the market and many years passing the FDA tests. Even so, how many drugs reveal serious problems after millions of people have taken it? Lawsuits out the ass are being filed the way it is. If drug companies went directly to human beings, surely people would die, especially from the percentage of drugs that never hit the shelves, and lawsuits would be extremely numerous and large.

I don't care what your political preference is, I don't think this is even debatable? Do you?

Rice klowN's picture

Well

You haven't said a word about this that I disagree with.

I think just about everything is debatable, but at some point tge debate must end once enough reason has been applied to determine the proper course. It is not debatable to use humans for testing on drugs without first trying them on animals because 1) we know that the drugs may not work properly and 2) we value human life more than we value rodent life. There is an ethical debate to using animals, but only in the scope of how it applies to the animals alone. What is undebatable at this point is whether the cost is greater for human testing or animal testing , and I think it's settled that the cost of human trials would be untenable to most humans.

Where this might turn into a debate would if the animals were vivisected by the millions for small gains on one product. If the animal cost, in lives, is far greater than the human lives saved, then you have a debate, but first round testing on humans is undebatable, only because the debate is settled.

MrBook's picture

very true

Indeed, we really don't have any choice but to start with animals . The testing is far from 100% effective, but it is an important first step.

Jean-claude's picture

not true

there are ways to test products on something other than animals.

MrBook's picture

test

there are ways... but they are not as effective. The only way to truly test the effect of a product on a biological system is to use a biological system.

Computer simulations are all well and good, but even those simulations need to have data as their foundation.

Jean-claude's picture

well..

...Yeah, I can see what your saying. Alright.

Close x
Don't Miss Out! |
Like us on Facebook?