skip to main content
Idioma:

The Flaws and Human Harms of Animal Experimentation

AKHTAR, AYSHA

Cambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics, 2015-10, Vol.24 (4), p.407-419 [Periódico revisado por pares]

New York, USA: Cambridge University Press

Texto completo disponível

Citações Citado por
  • Título:
    The Flaws and Human Harms of Animal Experimentation
  • Autor: AKHTAR, AYSHA
  • Assuntos: Animal care ; Animal Experimentation - ethics ; Animal Rights ; Animal Welfare - ethics ; Animals ; Bioethics ; Disease Models, Animal ; Drug Industry - ethics ; Ethics ; Humans ; Laboratory animals ; Medical research ; Special Section: Moving Forward in Animal Research Ethics ; Toxicity Tests - ethics ; Toxicity Tests - methods
  • É parte de: Cambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics, 2015-10, Vol.24 (4), p.407-419
  • Notas: ObjectType-Article-1
    SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
    ObjectType-Feature-2
    content type line 23
    I am deeply indebted to David DeGrazia, Tom Beauchamp, and John Pippin for their careful review and helpful comments. The opinions expressed here are those of the author and do not represent the official position of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration or the U.S. government.
  • Descrição: Nonhuman animal (“animal”) experimentation is typically defended by arguments that it is reliable, that animals provide sufficiently good models of human biology and diseases to yield relevant information, and that, consequently, its use provides major human health benefits. I demonstrate that a growing body of scientific literature critically assessing the validity of animal experimentation generally (and animal modeling specifically) raises important concerns about its reliability and predictive value for human outcomes and for understanding human physiology. The unreliability of animal experimentation across a wide range of areas undermines scientific arguments in favor of the practice. Additionally, I show how animal experimentation often significantly harms humans through misleading safety studies, potential abandonment of effective therapeutics, and direction of resources away from more effective testing methods. The resulting evidence suggests that the collective harms and costs to humans from animal experimentation outweigh potential benefits and that resources would be better invested in developing human-based testing methods.
  • Editor: New York, USA: Cambridge University Press
  • Idioma: Inglês
Links
Voltar para lista de resultados

  • Realização: ABCD-USP USP   Logos de Redes Sociais: Freepik

Buscando em bases de dados remotas. Favor aguardar.