Animal experimentation

[Danieltwotwenty]

http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/short ... d-thr.html

I find this really disturbing, I know animal experimentation goes on but I still find it shocking to see an article like it was just some normal practice and there are no ethical or moral issues sorrounding it.

Dan

[Ivellious]

I'm curious then, what are your views on animal experimentation? Like, do you find it unethical in general? do you only object to certain things? Or perhaps only doing experiments on certain animals?

Not trying to be nosy, just curious. This issue has been extensively raised recently at my university lately.

[Danieltwotwenty]

I'm curious then, what are your views on animal experimentation? Like, do you find it unethical in general? do you only object to certain things? Or perhaps only doing experiments on certain animals?

Not trying to be nosy, just curious. This issue has been extensively raised recently at my university lately.

Totally against causing any unessesary harm to any animal, I don't believe the end justifys the means.


Dan

[Ivellious]

Interesting. Even when without animal experimentation, almost zero medical advances could have occurred within the last century or so? Discounting the wholly unethical medical advances that the Nazis and such came up with using human experiments...

Again, not trying to bash your stance, just clarifying.

[Danieltwotwenty]

Interesting. Even when without animal experimentation, almost zero medical advances could have occurred within the last century or so? Discounting the wholly unethical medical advances that the Nazis and such came up with using human experiments...

Again, not trying to bash your stance, just clarifying.

That's ok no need to clarify, I already fully understand that.
I guess what you define as nessesary or unessesary is the real question and what constitutes as harm and what is not.

For example I eat meat, I have no issue with killing an animal for food as long as it is done in the quickest way possible, but I do take exception with causing unessesary extended pain to an animal.
Medical advances are of no great importance to me, if I die I die there is no issue for me as I know that this life is but a mere speck of an existence when compared to the eternal one that is coming next.
So in saying that I think a lot of animal experimentation is unessesary and causes harm to a creature that God has created which we have been charged as custodians of.
Sure I will take advantage of some existing medical advances but things like embryonic stem cells I could not but that is a different subject altogether.

Dan

[Ivellious]

Well, on that quick side note, just remember that the vast majority of stem cell research is not done using embryonic stem cells. Most stem cells used in research come from other sources. The university I attend is considered a major research institution, particularly in biology. We have over 50 individual research labs that study stem cells for medical purposes...none of which use embryonic stem cells. Just fyi.

I understand the point you make. But could you not also say that, just as people can eat meat to sustain themselves and better their quality of life, experimenting on animals can lead to essentially the same outcomes, if a little less direct? At least in America and the western world at large, most reputable research done on animals is guided by a strict set of guidelines designed to ensure the animals involved are kept comfortable and if they must die, that act is carried out as painlessly as possible. Actually, these rules are markedly more strict than meat production. Meat is produced in bulk and with herds, while research is extremely individualized, which in my opinion makes it far more open to humane treatment.

[Canuckster1127]

It's a hard line to define because experimentation, by definition has no guaranteed outcome, hence no guaranteed value to animal suffering for human benefit, assuming one sees that as a justifying factor. So, it then becomes a matter of whether the liklihood of a positive result or beneficial knowledge is strong enough to justify the use of experimental and if so are there then variables such as the types of animals used and the actual suffering inflicted on the animal.

I believe human benefit is a validating factor but it isn't an absolute validator. I generally don't subscribe to the pholosophy of utilitarianism with regard to human ethics and morals but it might be a legitimate standard to examine in animal use, as opposed to hard-line dominionism.

[Danieltwotwenty]

Well, on that quick side note, just remember that the vast majority of stem cell research is not done using embryonic stem cells. Most stem cells used in research come from other sources. The university I attend is considered a major research institution, particularly in biology. We have over 50 individual research labs that study stem cells for medical purposes...none of which use embryonic stem cells. Just fyi.

Yes Ivellious I realise that and that is why I did not mention adult stem cell research because I have no issue with it, I was only using it to illustrate a point that medical advances are not always ethical or moral and I choose to opt out in those cases.

I understand the point you make. But could you not also say that, just as people can eat meat to sustain themselves and better their quality of life, experimenting on animals can lead to essentially the same outcomes, if a little less direct?

My problem is not with the experimentation but with the harm caused to the animal and for what ends, like this monkey what sort of life is this monkey living locked away in some cage for most of it's life. Having to go through operations and pain for some outcome that may or may not be of some little "benefit" to mankind, you could say it might help an amputee one day but I say that amputee could live a fairly normal life without an arm or leg.
I think man is so concerned with extending his short life, he will throw away any sense of morality in exchange for his short life.
I am more focused on the next life, extending my life is of little value to me, I do not want to live in this life forever and when God see's that it is my time I will accept his gift with open arms.
I understand this may be very different for yourself, you may see this as moral because you have been able to extend the life of many humans who would otherwise cease to exist more quickly.
My presuppositions shape my world view just as yours shape your world view, I see this experimentation as wrong because of the revelation of God and Christ.

Dan