Learning Center
Plans & pricing Sign in
Sign Out

Animal Testing Animal Testing Adam Hazenfeld

VIEWS: 180 PAGES: 23

  • pg 1
									Animal Testing

  Adam Hazenfeld
    Drew Loper
    Ryan Burket
   Todd Handley
   Todd – will be discussing current practices
    in animal testing, what companies do…
   Adam – will be discussing deontological
    perspectives in animal testing.
   Drew – will also be discussing
    deontological perspectives on animal
   Ryan – will be discussing the practices
    that companies should be performing.
            What companies do…
   Revlon Cosmetics was one of the first large companies to fund
    research for alternatives with a $750,000 contribution to the
    Rockefeller University in 1979.( are they doing this because they are
    animal testing and don’t want to look like they are totally insensitive
    to this issue?)
   Proctor and Gamble are estimated to use up to 50,000 animals per
    year for testing. In 1991 the started testing on several guinea pigs
    to see irritancy for sunscreens, for which there was already data
   British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection (BUAV) recently
    uncovered details of an experiment carried out for Colgate-
    Palmolive by Columbia University in which guinea pigs were locked
    into small plastic tubes and a strong solution of surfactant was
    applied for four hours a day for three days, causing cracked and
    bleeding skin on the animals.
     Statistics from 2001 to 2002
   The total number of procedures on animals in 2002 rose to
    2.7 million, an increase of 4% from the previous year.
    (2001 had seen the lowest number of procedures reported
    since the current legislation in 1986).
   60% of all procedures on living animals are performed
    without any form of anaesthesia.
   Procedures on genetically manipulated (transgenic) animals
    now represent a quarter of all procedures, and have
    increased by 12% from last year. Procedures on transgenic
    animals have consistently risen every year since 1990 when
    they represented a mere 1.5% of the total.
   The number of procedures on mice, rats. sheep, pigs, birds
    and fish increased in 2002. Procedures on dogs and
    primates were similar to the previous year. Procedures
    guinea pigs, hamsters, rabbits, cats, amphibians, and
    horses/donkeys/crossbreeds decreased.
    Stats from 2001 to 2002 (cont’)
   There were no procedures on octopus, greyhounds, camelids,
    baboons or great apes. No great apes (that is chimpanzees,
    gorillas, and orang-utans) have been used in Great Britain since
    before the introduction of the current legislation in 1986.
   Categories of research: Procedures on animals for fundamental
    biological research increased by 11%, and now represent 31% of
    the total. Use of animals for the research, development and testing
    of drugs has been decreasing for several years and now account
    for 24% of the total.
   Toxicity tests accounted for 18% of all procedures. Toxicity
    testing of foodstuffs, household products, and agricultural
    chemicals increased, while tests of industrial substances
    decreased. Testing of cosmetic products or ingredients is no longer
    permitted in the UK.
   There was a disturbing increase in tests to detect cancer-causing
    substances and short-term lethal toxicity tests. Eye irritancy tests
    and pyrogenicity tests continued to decrease in 2002 –
    Stats from 2001 to 2002 (cont’)
   Procedures on animals for the production of
    monoclonal antibodies fell by 28%. All these
    procedures were for the initial immunization of
    animals, and none were for raising monoclonal
    antibodies in the abdomens of living animals
    (ascites method), thanks to the development of
    cell culture alternatives.
   There were 31 infringements recorded during
    2002. Of these, 26 were categorised as Class Two
    or Three infringements, and as such are defined
    as potentially criminal offences. However, no
    licences were revoked and there were no
      3 Principles of Deontology
   Responsibilities you are obligated to do
       -Stronger the relationship more
    responsibility to that relationship
   Determine if you are using someone solely
       as a means to an end
   Some Actions are Unethical
       -Uses Kant’s Categorical Imperative “I
    ought not act…”
    Responsibilities you are obligated
                  to do?
   Humans – Humans
    -Greater relationship to each other
   Duty to find cures for diseases and
    ailments that affect humans
   Rational Beings- Animals are not capable
    of formulating and acting out of respect of
    the moral law
    Responsibilities you are obligated
            to do? (cont…)
   We have duty not to abuse animals for the
    point of personal pleasure
   We have a duty to minimize the amount of
    unnecessary suffering in animals
   Have a duty to find alternative methods of
    animal testing
Using someone solely as a means
          to an end
   Animals are not
    rational beings
   Ethical to use animals
    in testing
   Caution against
    wastefulness and
    excessive cruelty
   Kant-animals have
    value in serving
    human purposes
    Deciding if actions are ethical
   Outcomes do not decide if actions are
   Actions are done out of duty
   Some actions are clearly wrong and some
    are right
   Kant’s Categorical Imperative
      Ross’s Prima Facie Duties
   Some duties more
    important than others
   Duty which has to be
    performed unless its
    outweighed by
    another duty
   Finding a cure for
    Cancer, AIDS, etc…
             Minimizing Pain
   The Minimum Pain Principle
   Pain Studies without Consciousness
         Training of Scientists
   Attitudes of Scientists
   Consider animals as subjects
   Maximal Theoretical Expertise and
    Technical Skill
Trends of Animals Used in
  Experiments in the US






      73   75   77   79     81   83     85     87   89   91

                          Dogs   Cats    Primates
             Great Britain
         Animal Experimentation
   1980 total was 4.6 million animals
   1990 total was 3.2 million animals
   Reduction of over 30 percent
         Animal Experimentation
   1977 total was 2.1 million
   1989 total was 1.3 million
   38 percent decrease
   Primate use has decreased by 55 percent
         Animal Experimentation
   1988 total was 1.1 million
   1990 total was 951,000
   A reduction of 10.5 percent
              The Three R’s
   Replacement alternatives
   Refinement alternatives
   Reduction alternatives
          Reduction Alternative
   Methods for obtaining comparable levels
    of information
   Experimental design and inappropriate
    statistical analysis problems
   Goes back to initial training of scientists
       Examples for Reduction
   Computer modeling
   Advanced analytical techniques
   In vitro techniques
   Other alternative testing methods
   Although animal testing is necessary and
    ethical, as humans we have the duty to
    minimize the harm involved and reduce
    the number of animals used in

To top