Animal Research Ethics
Introduction
The balance that exists between animal rights and using biomedical research is a delicate issue that has significant societal implications. There have been major debates as to weather and how scientists are to use animal models and opposing viewpoints which are rather difficult to reconcile. A significant number of animal activists have called out for a total abolition of research that involves using animals. On the other hand, scientists have insisted that some experiments need the use of animals for them to be successful and further claim that minimization of using animal research would act as an impediment to their research.
Ethics
It is very unfair for human beings to be used for research purposes. I disagree with animal research as it is not fair for innocent human beings to operated, drugged or anesthetized just to find cur. The good response in the discussion that appears to be ethical is the one by DR Reynolds that states the impartiality may work to the advantage of humans as they are the arbitrators. For instance, as much as the utilization of human cloning may be established, but to encourage in vitro fertilization. This is ethical in a way that the dangers of using animals for experiments will be brought out and even prohibited while subsidies are given into vitro fertilization. This would lead to the stamp of approval mentioned which will make the market to stay the same offering choices or rather blocking access. This idea is ethical in that it creates a bioethics reasoning ground. Giving reasons helps in justifying a good position ethically. Also, it creates universalization as it challenges the scientists ethically. The idea of universalization often pops up while making moral decisions like the one at hand. This way the issue at hand can be disused by the significant parties collectively thus arriving at a reasonable answer.
An experiment that has to use animals needs to be done in a manner that does not cost the animal any pain and if possible, just like Dr. Reynolds explained in the case scenario alternatives ways are essential. When a scientist takes the lives of animals used in experiments into their hands, then they must avoid unnecessary treatment of animals. This should not just be excursive during experiments but also in the way that they treat this animal before experiments. In this regard, it should be a legally binding regulation that effectively reflects ethical considerations not necessarily an undue intrusion of freedom research. If this is put into practice, then the right balance will be introduced. A balance that encourages framework which might do more in reducing the number of animals used as experiments. In the guidance of law makers, while drafting regulations on animal research, both should address valid critic who promotes valuable research. However, society and scientist should continue encouraging this debate in defining what is needed and necessary.