Corrigendum.

Abstract

Developing World BioethicsVolume 20, Issue 4 p. 228-228 CORRIGENDUMFree Access Corrigendum This article corrects the following: A moderate Buddhist animal research ethics Andrew Fenton, Volume 19Issue 2Developing World Bioethics pages: 106-115 First Published online: February 21, 2019 First published: 31 December 2020 https://doi.org/10.1111/dewb.12295AboutSectionsPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat In Fenton, A. (2019), errors were published in the second paragraph on page 109. The terms “sedated” and “sedate” should have read as “anesthetized” and “anesthetize”, respectively. The sentences are corrected below. Examples include minor (recovery) surgeries on anesthetized animals, the use of physical restraints beyond mere observational studies, food and water deprivation that exceeds what occurs naturally, and doses of various noxious chemical agents but at non-lethal levels. Examples include the use of chemical agents at debilitating or lethal levels, the use of chemical restraints for invasive studies (such restraints immobilize but do not anesthetize the research subjects), and experimental models of human pathologies that will kill the research subjects. Reference Fenton, A. (2019). Moderate Buddhist animal research ethics. Developing World Bioethics. 2019; 19: 106– 115.https://doi.org/10.1111/dewb.12220Wiley Online LibraryPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar Volume20, Issue4December 2020Pages 228-228 ReferencesRelatedInformation