Abstract
While the use of sentient animals in biomedical research is known to be ethically contentious, the fact that scientific issues surround the practice is typically ignored. The justification for using sentient animals in research relies on the alleviation of human suffering that purportedly results from such studies and that such breakthroughs cannot occur without studying whole, intact, biological systems. As all biological systems are examples of evolved complex systems, we question the ability of one evolved complex system to predict outcomes for a second. A classic claim regarding the advances in medical care arising from the use of intact sentient animals in research is the discovery and development of antibacterial agents. We give a brief overview of infectious disease research in the 19th century, then examine the history of antibacterials in the first half of the 20th century. We focus on the use of intact sentient animals to test antibacterials for efficacy and side effects-which is also the primary use of animal models in drug development today. As the development of antibacterials is frequently cited as an illustration of the necessity of using intact animal models in drug development, we also examine the impact this position has had on drug development in general. The development of antibacterials, and drugs in general, is placed in the context of evolution, complexity science, and conserved processes. We conclude that the commonly related history revolving around the necessity of intact animal models in the development of antibacterials is not entirely accurate and that this finding has ethical, financial, legal, medical, and scientific ramifications.
Highlights
IntroductionThe fact that the use of intact sentient nonhuman animals (here after referred to as animals) in science and biomedical research is ethically controversial is well known [1,2,3,4,5,6]
The fact that the use of intact sentient nonhuman animals in science and biomedical research is ethically controversial is well known [1,2,3,4,5,6]
Less appreciated is the fact that some uses of animal models have been questioned on scientific grounds [1,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23].The justification for currently using intact sentient animals revolves around the advances in medical care that have allegedly come from using them as models
Summary
The fact that the use of intact sentient nonhuman animals (here after referred to as animals) in science and biomedical research is ethically controversial is well known [1,2,3,4,5,6]. Less appreciated is the fact that some uses of animal models have been questioned on scientific grounds [1,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23].The justification for currently using intact sentient animals revolves around the advances in medical care that have allegedly come from using them as models One example of such a medical advance is the discovery and development of antibacterial agents, commonly referred to as antibiotics. Throughout the 20th century, research using live animals has led to ground-breaking advances in medicine and treatment for human diseases: such as organ-transplant techniques, antibiotics, modern anaesthetics, the vaccine for Polio and the vital discovery of insulin as a treatment for diabetes . . .”[24]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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 callDisclaimer: 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.
