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
Open AccessReview

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
Animals 2018, 8(2), 28; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani8020028
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)
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
MDPI and ACS Style

Khoo, S.Y.-S. Justifiability and Animal Research in Health: Can Democratisation Help Resolve Difficulties? Animals 2018, 8, 28. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani8020028

AMA Style

Khoo SY-S. Justifiability and Animal Research in Health: Can Democratisation Help Resolve Difficulties? Animals. 2018; 8(2):28. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani8020028

Chicago/Turabian Style

Khoo, Shaun Y.-S. 2018. "Justifiability and Animal Research in Health: Can Democratisation Help Resolve Difficulties?" Animals 8, no. 2: 28. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani8020028

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

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Search more from Scilit
 
Search
Back to TopTop