Abstract

Simple SummaryAnimal experimentation evokes strong emotional responses in people on both sides of the debate surrounding its ethical status. However, the true level of its usefulness to society may only be discerned by careful examination of reliable scientific evidence. My recent book, The Costs and Benefits of Animal Experiments, reviewed more than 500 relevant scientific publications. Recently in this journal, however, a reviewer essentially accused me of bias. Yet the conclusions of my book are based on sound reasoning and strong evidence, and no critic has yet provided any substantive evidence to refute them.My recent book entitled The Costs and Benefits of Animal Experiments seeks to answer a key question within animal ethics, namely: is animal experimentation ethically justifiable? Or, more precisely, is it justifiable within the utilitarian cost:benefit framework that fundamentally underpins most regulations governing animal experimentation? To answer this question I reviewed more than 500 scientific publications describing animal studies, animal welfare impacts, and alternative research, toxicity testing and educational methodologies. To minimise bias I focused primarily on large-scale systematic reviews that had examined the human clinical and toxicological utility of animal studies. Despite this, Dr. Susanne Prankel recently reviewed my book in this journal, essentially accusing me of bias. However, she failed to provide any substantive evidence to refute my conclusions, let alone evidence of similar weight to that on which they are based. Those conclusions are, in fact, firmly based on utilitarian ethical reasoning, informed by scientific evidence of considerable strength, and I believe they are robust.

Highlights

  • In this journal Dr Susanne Prankel reviewed my new book [1], The Costs and Benefits of Animal Experiments [2]

  • As stated in my book: “The core principle underpinning animal experimentation regulation and policy is that the likely benefits of such research must outweigh its expected costs

  • Systematic reviews investigating the clinical utility of invasive chimpanzee studies, and the toxicological utility of animal carcinogenicity studies, both form major foci of my book

Read more

Summary

Introduction

In this journal Dr Susanne Prankel reviewed my new book [1], The Costs and Benefits of Animal Experiments [2]. I appreciate the care Dr Prankel clearly took with several aspects of her review. She appears to have taken objection to the conclusions of my book. I stated that, “When considering costs and benefits overall, one cannot reasonably conclude that the benefits accruing to human patients or consumers, or to those motivated by scientific curiosity or profit, exceed the costs incurred by animals subjected to scientific procedures. The evidence indicates that actual human benefit is rarely—if ever—sufficient to justify such costs.”

Accusations of Bias
Utilitarian Ethical Evaluation of Animal Experiments
Human Clinical and Toxicological Utility of Animal Models
Factors Limiting Human Utility
Costs Incurred by Laboratory Animals
A Debatable Interpretation?
The Evaluation of Evidence
Findings
The Palgrave Macmillan Animal Ethics Series

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.