Amazing advances in medicine continue with the help of animal testing. In this case, rats were deliberately wounded to observe the healing process. A moral minefield.
If one thinks that unique human beings are more important than lab rats that are farmed to be experimented on then it is perfectly moral.
Put another way, if someone in your family had 3rd degree burns to their face and whole upper body and needed new skin. Would you sacrifice a few lab rats to save your family member's life and let them lead a normal life again?
Or would you say, sorry we could have helped you but we couldn't bear to hurt the poor rats to find the solution to your problem?
(and we can replace skin with hearts, liver, kidney, lungs, eyes and any other organ that might be able to be replaced in the future)
Exactly, it depends on the value you put on animal welfare.
I don't put a particularly high value on it, but I can see that deciding where to put the line is a "moral minefield". In this case, I am more than happy to sacrifice lab rats.
But what about when the product needs to be tested on pigs/monkeys? What if the product then fails its human trials. Is it still worth it?
Yes this will be an increasing topic of debate in the press as genomics, medicine, nanotech, designer drugs and robotics fields' progress in the coming years.
Funny thing is that your's and my opinions of where the line should be drawn are irrelevant along with the opinion of sovereign governments' (opinions and related laws). The scientists to do this work will do it anyway and anywhere based on available funding and their personal moral compass.
4 comments
[ 4.2 ms ] story [ 18.1 ms ] threadIf one thinks that unique human beings are more important than lab rats that are farmed to be experimented on then it is perfectly moral.
Put another way, if someone in your family had 3rd degree burns to their face and whole upper body and needed new skin. Would you sacrifice a few lab rats to save your family member's life and let them lead a normal life again?
Or would you say, sorry we could have helped you but we couldn't bear to hurt the poor rats to find the solution to your problem?
(and we can replace skin with hearts, liver, kidney, lungs, eyes and any other organ that might be able to be replaced in the future)
I don't put a particularly high value on it, but I can see that deciding where to put the line is a "moral minefield". In this case, I am more than happy to sacrifice lab rats.
But what about when the product needs to be tested on pigs/monkeys? What if the product then fails its human trials. Is it still worth it?
Funny thing is that your's and my opinions of where the line should be drawn are irrelevant along with the opinion of sovereign governments' (opinions and related laws). The scientists to do this work will do it anyway and anywhere based on available funding and their personal moral compass.