Next Article in Journal
A Comparison of Cats (Felis silvestris catus) Housed in Groups and Single Cages at a Shelter: A Retrospective Matched Cohort Study
Next Article in Special Issue
Necessary, but Not Sufficient. The Benefit Concept in the Project Evaluation of Animal Research in the Context of Directive 2010/63/EU
Previous Article in Journal
The Impact of Excluding Food Guarding from a Standardized Behavioral Canine Assessment in Animal Shelters
Previous Article in Special Issue
Exploring the Gaps in Practical Ethical Guidance for Animal Welfare Considerations of Field Interventions and Innovations Targeting Dogs and Cats
Article Menu
Issue 2 (February) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessReview
Animals 2018, 8(2), 28; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani8020028

Justifiability and Animal Research in Health: Can Democratisation Help Resolve Difficulties?

Center for Studies in Behavioral Neurobiology/Groupe de Recherche en Neurobiologie Comportementale, Department of Psychology, Concordia University, Montreal, QC H4B 1R6, Canada
Received: 13 January 2018 / Revised: 8 February 2018 / Accepted: 12 February 2018 / Published: 14 February 2018
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Animal Ethics)
Full-Text   |   PDF [241 KB, uploaded 14 February 2018]

Abstract

Current animal research ethics frameworks emphasise consequentialist ethics through cost-benefit or harm-benefit analysis. However, these ethical frameworks along with institutional animal ethics approval processes cannot satisfactorily decide when a given potential benefit is outweighed by costs to animals. The consequentialist calculus should, theoretically, provide for situations where research into a disease or disorder is no longer ethical, but this is difficult to determine objectively. Public support for animal research is also falling as demand for healthcare is rising. Democratisation of animal research could help resolve these tensions through facilitating ethical health consumerism or giving the public greater input into deciding the diseases and disorders where animal research is justified. Labelling drugs to disclose animal use and providing a plain-language summary of the role of animals may help promote public understanding and would respect the ethical beliefs of objectors to animal research. National animal ethics committees could weigh the competing ethical, scientific, and public interests to provide a transparent mandate for animal research to occur when it is justifiable and acceptable. Democratic processes can impose ethical limits and provide mandates for acceptable research while facilitating a regulatory and scientific transition towards medical advances that require fewer animals. View Full-Text
Keywords: animal ethics; consequentialism; harm-benefit analysis; justification; democratisation; ethical consumerism; animal ethics committees animal ethics; consequentialism; harm-benefit analysis; justification; democratisation; ethical consumerism; animal ethics committees
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).
SciFeed

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Khoo, S.Y.-S. Justifiability and Animal Research in Health: Can Democratisation Help Resolve Difficulties? Animals 2018, 8, 28.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Animals EISSN 2076-2615 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top