The Controversial Issue Of Animal Ethics Essay — страница 4

  • Просмотров 279
  • Скачиваний 5
  • Размер файла 20
    Кб

chimps share 98% of our DNA (Cramer 1). The difference between the DNA of a human and the Secor 7 DNA of a chimp can fluctuate from 99.6% to 98%. Another interesting fact about the similarities in man and chimp is the difference between human and chimp is only 160 enzymes (Cramer 1). With this closeness in DNA we are able to see what will potentially happen to humans when put on a drug or whatever the intervention happens to be. The results may not be 100% accurate due to the 0.4% to 2% difference in DNA, but there is not a whole lot of room for error in this department. So experimenting on Chimps lets scientists predict whether or not a drug will be safe or effective on human beings, and that can potentially save lives. Through the information provided in this paper one can come

to their own conclusion on whether or not animal experimentation is ethical. Through my long hard hours put into researching this topic I have been able to come to my own conclusion. I feel that the benefits of animal experimentation outway the draw backs of the disadvantages. Seen as how animals are also receiving cures for diseases that are spread throughout their species, along with humans. That in my eyes is a much greater factor then the minimal pain the animal is put through. Its not like there are no laws or regulations put on company and scientists doing these kinds of experiments. So I say that animal experimentation is ethical. Americans for Medical Progress Educational Foundation. ?Advances in Medicine Through Animal Research.? http://www.ampet.org/history.htm (7, Feb.

2000). Americans for Medical Progress Educational Foundation. ?Animal Rights Terrorists Target Medical Research Facilities.? http://www.ampet.org/althits.htm (7, Feb. 2000). Americans for Medical Progress Educational Foundation. ?The Tragic Hypocrisy of ?Animal Rights.? http://www.ampet.org/articles/article1.htm (7, Feb. 2000). Cramer, Guy. ?Genetic Accounting.? http://ytiles.com/accounting.htm (7, March 2000). FRAME. ?Alternatives.? http://frame-uk.demon.co.uk/alternat.htm (31, Jan. 2000). IACUC. ?Concept and Methods To Limit Animal Use.? http://www.ahsc.arizona.edu/uac/iacuc/laws/concept.shtml (16, Feb. 2000). Marshall, Eliot. ?NIH Ethics Office Tapped for a Promotion.? SCIENCE 284 (1999): 1749- 51. Murray, Dr. Joseph E. ?Animals Hold The Key To Saving Human Lives.? Los Angeles

Times. (5, Feb. 1996). Secor 10 Partners in Research. ?Animals Benefit From Biomedical Research.? http:www.pirweb.org/animals_do_benefit.htm(15, Feb. 2000). Partners in Research. ?The History of Biomedical Research.? http://www.pirweb.org/history.htm (15, Feb. 2000). Phillips-Conroy, Jane E. ?Field Primatology and Biomedical Research.? SCIENCE 284 (1999): 1. Sabin, Heloisa. ?Animal Research Saves Human Lives.? The Wall Street Journal (18, Oct. 1995). Scientific American. ?Animal Research Is Vital to Medicine.? http://www.sciam.com/0297/issue/0297botting.html (16, Feb. 2000). Scientific American. ?Animal Research Is Wasteful and Misleading.? http://www.sciam.com.0297.issue.0297barnard.html (16, Feb. 2000). Scientific American. ?The Numbers of Research Animals.?

http://www.sciam.com/0297issue/0297/trendsbox.html (16, Feb. 2000). Seachrist, Lisa. ?Lab Rats Still Not Animals.? SCIENCE 264 (1994): 1533. Wadman, Meredith. ?Bid to Give Legal Protection to Laboratory Mice In US.? Nature 393 (1998): 6. Secor 11 Wadman, Meredith. ?Legal Bid Could Extend US Animal Welfare Law to Cover Lab Rodents.? Nature 400 (1999): 197- 98. Wadman, Meredith. ?Population Explosion Raises Alarm Over Lab Animal Health.? Nature 391 (1998): 623.