Ethics Of The Use Of Laboratory Animals

Ethics of the use of laboratory animals

Introduction

The ethical-moral dilemma associated with animal experimentation is supported by the contrast of two great foundations. On the one hand, attempt against the integrity of the animal, taking into account the possible damage that may suffer due to the experiment. On the other hand, the vital need to carry out these experiments is interposed because they suppose a great impact on life and health of both humans and animals themselves.

Because of the contrast of both arguments, two extreme and opposite ethical inclinations are manifested. Therefore, the belief that the use of animals for experimental purposes is always unjustified arises. In an antagonistic way, there is the conviction that animals can be arbitrarily used to our free will.

Developing

All these arguments demonstrate the existence of very diverse opinions about animal experimentation, however, the majority of the population opts for a moderate belief that accepts the use of animals for experimentation, but under predetermined ethical-moral conditions.

The history of the moral ethical dilemma caused by animal experimentation dates back to antiquity, since much of the knowledge, already in ancient times, were largely based on anatomical dissection processes.

Around 350 to year.C. Experiments with pigs and other specimens were carried out that allowed studying their body and explaining their development. They then arise of great importance in the field such as Aristotle, Anaxagoras and Hippocrates among others.

These new advances give rise to the application of in vivo dissection processes, known as ‘vivisection’ that allowed demonstrating the circulation of blood through the body in 1628.

The loss largely of respect for the integrity of animals may be due to different social and cultural causes. Among them would be the separation and differentiation of human and animal ethics, finding references in the biblical field because living beings are considered, organisms below man whose purpose is to be under service and human domination.

On the other hand, the 18th century marks a turning point in this area, since different English philosophers are questioned through moralistic ethics the possible suffering and exploitation of animals by man by man.

Since the twentieth century, many advances and discoveries have demonstrated the need for animal experimentation for the development of modern science and medicine. Research such as those carried out by Pasteur about infectious diseases or Lister about Asepsia show the enormous benefits of animal experimentation for humanity itself, since they would have significantly reduced the number of deaths thanks to their findings.

On the other hand, criticisms of animal experimentation have never ceased attending the justification that such research would not reflect human conditions. Simultaneously, the utopian theory arises that explains that, if these practices had been illegal, substitute techniques would have been invented that did not involve animals. Consequently, the ethical-moral need to initiate the creation of a legislative and regulatory process with different guides associated with animal experimentation arises.

In relation to the ethical-moral legislation of animal experimentation, a character called Marshall Hall arose that proposed in 1831 different principles that should be considered the bases of regulation of animal experimentation:

• Experimentation should not be the main method if it can be replaced by observation.
• Every experiment must have a clearly defined objective.
• Every scientific experiment must be well classified to avoid repetitions.
• The experiments that require the use of animals must be carried out avoiding, as far as possible, the pain and suffering of the animal.
• The experimental method used must be carried out precisely so that clear results are given to the repetition of the experiment.

These points mentioned constitute, in general, the foundations of current bioethics, having been transferred to both national and international laws. In the European sphere we find Directive 86/609/CEE, which refers to animal experimentation in its article 7, the previous ethical principles being embodied: “When a procedure must be executed, the choice of species will be subject to detained exam and,If necessary, its motivation will be exposed to the responsible authority;When choosing between procedures, those who use the minimum number of animals will be chosen, cause less pain, suffering, anguish or lasting damage and are more likely to give satisfactory results ”.

On the other hand, legislation is not homogeneous throughout the European Community, because although ethical bases and principles are equal, we can appreciate that there are variations throughout the continent. One of the most representative examples is the case of Germany, where the use of animals is illegal to develop products such as cosmetics or detergents, as well as experimenting with transgenic animals. In Spain, on the other hand, it is not so there are current laws that allow to testing ingredients of cosmetic products in animals. This law has tried to be repealed, but since it has been postponed, the use of experimentation animals for lucrative purposes in important industrial sectors continues to be legal.

In turn, it highlights the importance of creating established action protocols that must be taken into account when working with animals. These protocols are based on the points cited in European agreements:

• The cause of the use of the species and number of animals required should be indicated exactly
• The use of alternative procedures of less invasive nature should be considered
• The use of minor evolutionary species must always be taken into account
• It is necessary to have qualified and specialized personnel during animal experimentation
• It must have methods of sedation, analgesia, appropriate anesthesia or euthanasia in order to avoid the pain, suffering and stress of the animal

Consequently, in order to determine the ethical limit of animal experimentation we can establish that the highest research priority must be to provide the best care of the animal, avoiding the repetition of experimental practices.

conclusion

To conclude, we can establish that the moral ethics of the use of animals in experimental processes lies in the value of the experiment and in the probability that the experiment itself contributes to the evolution and improvement of humanity and the rest of living beings.

On the other hand, the use of animals must meet a series of requirements that ensure a rational, ethical and moral use of animals that must necessarily be combined a correct work methodology.

Finally, it is worth highlighting the importance of looking for alternatives such as cell or tissue cultivation through research in bosses such as molecular and cellular biology, giving rise to useful results for humans without the need to perform experimentation in other species.

Bibliography

• Biomedicine and biomaterial service. [Online publication]. The protection of experimentation animals. 1997.
• BOE. Ratification instrument of the European Agreement on Protection of Vertebrate Animals used for experimental purposes and other scientific purposes, made in Strasbourg on March 18, 1986. BOE. 1990.
• Zurlo J, Rudacille D, Goldberg Am. Animal Experimentation: Ethics and Law. In: Animals and Alternatives in Testing History, Science, and Ethics.
• BOE. Royal Decree 223/1988, of March 14, on the protection of animals used for experimentation and other scientific purposes.
• Gtema. [Online publication]. Document 12 of the Gtema. 1998.
• European Commission (2017) “Ban on Animal Testing”, Growth: Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and Sme
• European Commission (2013) Seventh Report on statistics related to the number of animals used for experimentation and other scientific purposes in the Member States of the European Union,