Ask the experimenters why they experiment on animals, and the answer is: "Because the animals are like us." Ask the experimenters why it is morally okay to experiment on animals, and the answer is: "Because the animals are not like us." Animal experimentation rests on a logical contradiction. -- Charles R. MagelLast night on "All Things Considered" on National Public Radio a reporter aired a story about a procedure that may prevent certain genetic diseases.
It's controversial because it involves altering genes of future generations, thus the possibility for engineering a "superior" race of people.
But while reporter Richard Harris questioned the ethical implications of this procedure, not once did he question the ethics involved in discovering it: Researchers at Oregon Health and Science University experimented on rhesus monkeys.
Somehow it's a given that it's ethical to imprison these animals and to conduct experiments on them. If researchers did the same to humans, they'd be considered monsters.
If you've taken a psychology class, you probably remember psychologist Harry Harlow's study involving rhesus monkeys in the 1950s.
Harlow's most famous experiment involved giving young rhesus monkeys a choice between two different "mothers." One was made of soft terrycloth, but provided no food. The other was made of wire, but provided food from an attached baby bottle.The results showed that infants prefer the soft touch of a "mother" to food.
Harlow removed young monkeys from their natural mothers a few hours after birth and left them to be "raised" by these mother surrogates. The experiment demonstrated that the baby monkeys spent significantly more time with their cloth mother than with their wire mother.
Researchers couldn't use human infants because removing them from their mothers would be cruel. Monkeys are different from humans, though, so it's ok to separate mother and baby. Right? Of course, the results could be extrapolated to human infants because monkeys are so similar to humans.
(An infant rhesus monkey clings to a terrycloth "mother" while he'd rather be with his own in his own environment.)
Posts
10 comments:
thank you for drawing attention to such a horrific practice Tracy. i can think of few things that are more evil than animal experimentation. i wonder if humans in our almost infinite greed & selfishness will ever learn that the end will never justify the means.
The ends already HAVE justified the means, in every drug you take, in every food you eat, in the computer you use, and in the clothes you wear. Parts of the development for all these things including animal experimentation.
I can think of several things more evil than animal experimentation. One of them is the tendency for humans to believe the things they read without a thorough justification of the premises they espouse.
In case you weren't sure, I'm referring to you, and this article.
-Animal Lover (and I am)
Anonymous, I'm vegan. The food I eat doesn't come from animals nor do my clothes.
One cannot be an animal lover and still pay to have animals killed, as you're espousing.
I'm vegan too. Some of the food out there is a product of animal experimentation, and ALL of the drugs out there are. The ends justify the means when the ends are the vast majority of cures from disease we've found and the vaster majority of cures we will find.
We can make the lab rat experience much kinder than the experience of humans with the same disease, with meds that drug the rat into oblivion.
I detailed my thoughts here:
http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/95v3o/im_vegan_i_also_believe_myself_to_be_sane_ama/c0bnwzo
Allie, I'm not sure what food you're referring to. But the whole-food, plant-based diet that people should be eating has never required animal experimentation.
Also, perhaps the reason that cures to diseases have come from animal experimentation is because that's the model researchers focused their energy on.
All the medication out there relies on animal experimentation because that's the law.
"Vivisection appeals to the basest instincts of fear and cowardice and is rooted in the unjust principle that 'might makes right' and that 'the end justifies the means', thus permitting any cruelty on the tyrant's plea of necessity. Before the bar of human justice, vivisection stands condemned on three main counts: cruelty to animals, uselessness to Man, and obstruction on the path of true knowledge."
-Dr. M. Beddow Baily, M.D., IRCP, Member, Royal College of Surgeons, in his book "More Spotlights on Vivisection" London, 1958
great quote Nikki and a new one to me. thanks for your input on the very disturbing & totally unnecessary practice of torturing helpless creatures all in the name of profits.
I was so fascinated by Harlow's research when I studied Psychology in high school. Now I realize how sad and cruel it was. Thanks for reminding us that such cruelties are not a thing of the past.
Anonymous said...
The ends already HAVE justified the means, in every drug you take, in every food you eat, in the computer you use, and in the clothes you wear...
What confounds me is that animal users always assume that the here and now is always the best that could have been.
Without our use of animals who knows how much farther we would be? There is no "proof" that everything we have is the best there is... We like to think this because these are the choices we made and how we justify them... But it doesn't make it so.
Furthermore, I'm vegan too - and none of my food or clothing had to be tested on animals either. And at 55 I'm drug/pharm/med-free. I attribute much of my health to a plant based diet. Also, I don't know if I had to that I would trust any drug not cleared for humans by human study - It's just not reliable (or ethical).
Ask the experimenters why they experiment on animals, and the answer is: "Because the animals are like us." Ask the experimenters why it is morally okay to experiment on animals, and the answer is: "Because the animals are not like us." Animal experimentation rests on a logical contradiction.
~Charles R. Magel
Post a Comment