Written by Lipika B. Nabajya
Edited by Himanshi Shivani
Animal testing or testing on animals to meet purposes pertaining to scientific research has been practiced for ages especially since the beginning of the twentieth century.
In most cases, the core of the discussion focuses on whether animal testing is morally permissible and ethical, and whether or not it is the only way to test various products and procedures on animals to determine whether they would be beneficial and safe for the use to humans. However, experimentation on animals and non-human beings are not always conducted just for the benefit of human beings. Sometimes, the species that benefit from the research are other non-human animals, often including other members of the same species of the animal being tested as well.
Scientists who defend the practice of testing on animals for the benefit of humans put forth the argument that the benefits for humans substantially outnumber the damages incurred by animals and nonhuman species. Some scientists believe that our moral obligations sometimes extend their manifestations only to other members of the moral community. A moral community includes people who can reflect on any situation morally on the basis of logic, reasoning, and ethics. Non-human animals comparatively show lesser capabilities of reflecting at a particular situation and they are not capable of these kinds of reflections. Hence, they cannot be counted as members of the moral community.
The earliest references to animal testing can be traced within the writings of the Greeks back to the second and fourth centuries BC. Aristotle and Erasistratus were among the first to perform experiments on living animals. Galen, a 2nd-century Roman physician, dissected pigs, and goats, ever since he became renowned as the "father of vivisection".
Applications of animal testing include:
1.Testing disease and their treatment
2.Breeding
3.Defense research and toxicology
4.Cosmetics testing, etc.
The terms animal testing, animal experimentation, animal research, in vivo testing, and vivisection have similar denotations but different connotations. As science advanced and the experimentation on animals increased, especially the practice of vivisection so did criticism and controversy. On the opposite side of the talk, those in favor of animal testing held that experiments on animals were necessary to advance medical and biological knowledge. The regulations and norms differ for different experiments.
However, the scenario today is almost contradictory to the ethical beliefs of animal testing. Scientists and researchers say they are carrying out massive tests on monkeys, ferrets, and other animals of similar kind in the search for a vaccine that can curb COVID-19 pandemic. The testings not only help researchers learn about how the vaccine responds to the immune system but also the body’s natural defense against the COVID-19 disease. If a vaccine causes the immune system to react in the opposite way, it could worsen existing disease affecting the overall health of the patient. Researchers and scientists from all over the world have already been seeking millions of human subjects as well as non-human subjects to take part in large COVID-19 vaccine research and studies. Efforts to find a vaccine to prevent COVID-19 have quickly increased as the virus continues to mutate and the disease continues to spread causing a worldwide pandemic. The development of vaccines is the global need at present.
0 Comments