Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Vivisection”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 181 records · Page 10Linked to original sources
PubMed1983

Antivivisection.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Animals↗
PubMed2005

Laboratory animals and the art of empathy.

Consistency is the hallmark of a coherent ethical philosophy. When considering the morality of particular behaviour, one should look to identify comparable situations and test one's approach to the former against one's approach to the latter. The obvious comparator for animal experiments is non-consensual experiments on people. In both cases, suffering and perhaps death is knowingly caused to the victim, the intended beneficiary is someone else, and the victim does not consent. Animals suffer just as people do. As we condemn non-consensual experiments on people, we should, if we are to be consistent, condemn non-consensual experiments on animals. The alleged differences between the two practices often put forward do not stand up to scrutiny. The best guide to ethical behaviour is empathy--putting oneself in the potential victim's shoes. Again to be consistent, we should empathise with all who may be adversely affected by our behaviour. By this yardstick, too, animal experiments fail the ethical test.

Animal Experimentation↗
PubMed1981

Currents and portents in biomedical research.

The present progress and prospects of biomedical research are discussed by reference to the syndrome of "restrictive utilitarianism" which governs much of the public and official attitude to research. The signs and symptoms of the condition are described and some of the prophylactic and therapeutic measures that should be taken to offset the threat it poses to the future welfare of man and animals are suggested.

Animals↗
PubMed2003

"Would you let your child die rather than experiment on animals?" A comparative questions approach.

By placing the title question alongside five comparative questions and offering answers to the whole set as given by seven imaginary respondents, this paper analyzes the question's deceptiveness and the inconsistency of its implied claims. Apart from ambiguities of situation, history, and agency, the question's demand for a choice between "your child" and "nonhuman animals" obscures a field of other values regarding (1) species, (2) family ties, and (3) the wrongness-in-itself (or otherwise) of the experiments envisioned. This paper argues that while a "No" answer to the title question does not, as intended by the questioner, support the experimental status quo, even a "Yes" answer does not reflect a choice between one's own child and animals.

Animal Experimentation↗
PubMed1977

Freedom of inquiry and subjects' rights: historical perspective.

The author presents an historical overview of the various attitudes toward animal and human experimentation. He cites advocates (Bacon, Welch) and opponents (Johnson, Shaw) and traces the debate from the Graeco-Roman era, through the rise of the scientific establishment, to the present. Controversy over the fundamental rights of individual research subjects versus a future-oriented freedom of inquiry has been and continues to be a dilemma for clinicians and research scientists.

Animals↗