Vivisection: Progress as Paradigm :: Animals Science Papers

Vivisection Progress as ParadigmProgress is an optional goal, not an unconditional commitment, and its tempo has nothing sacred about it. A slower progress in the conquest of disease would not threaten society, but would be threatened by the wear of those moral values whose loss, possibly caused by the too ruthless pursuit of scientific progress, would make its most dazzling triumphs not worth having. Hans Jonas, bioethicist, 1969I. Introduction The overturn over animal experimentation for scientific advancement is serious and highly controversial. It brings our assumptions about the value of human life and scientific advancement into question. Analysis of this brawl does not purport any easy solutions there are many points of view. However, it is apparent that the tones are shifting to entertain alternative methods. In allowing the interests of our own species to reverse the greater interests of members of other species, can we be equated with racists? Sexists?1 To oppose the use of live animals in scientific experimentation do we not oppose all inhuman treatment to animals, and should we not all be vegans? Should we not charge congress on all fronts for every connection between us and non-human animals? All of these questions will be touched on in this paper, but I will focus more directly on the vivisection controversy, for which I will borrow the fleshly inflammation Fronts definition Any use of animals in science or research that exploits or harms them. I will give a brief history institutionalize experimentation and challenge the antagonistic viewpoints presented about the efficacy of the use of live animals in research, and offer some budding alternatives. II. History of Institutionalized Experimentation Experiments involving animals for scientific interests began centuries ago, but became institutionalized with Francois Magendie (1787-1855). Magendie was known as a hardworking and brutal physiologist. Barbara Orlans describes some of his experiments in In the Name of Science Issues in Responsible Animal ExperimentationMagendie isolated a section of the dog intestine so that it was attached to the rest of the body only by a single artery and vein. This of course was done without anesthesia. Magendie injected various powerful poisons including prussic acid into the intestinal segment and found that the animal was poisoned just as if the normal connections had been intact. He obtained a akin result by injecting a leg detached except for its crural artery and vein.