title: Ethical issues in animal experimentation--view of the animal rightist.
abstract: The basic stand-point of the animal rightist is that other animals than man are living beings also capable of feeling pain and distress, pleasure and joy. The capacity for suffering we have in common with other animals. This is quite obvious from the biological point of view and, in point of fact, a prerequisite for a lot of animal experimentation, the results of which would be invalid if the likeness was false. There would be no need for ethics of any kind, if man was not sentient. However, since sentience is a characteristic of other animals as well as man, logically the ethics applied to mankind must be extended to encompass all animals. For the animal rightist it is apparent that not only man, but other animals, too, must be attributed an intrinsic value. Consequently, using animals in procedures to which they would not consent, if they were able to speak for themselves, and which are carried out solely because of the means of power man possesses and the other animals lack, and are used to exploit those who are less powerful, is not good ethics. It is the dirty reality of oppression, based on prejudice, which is of the same brand as racism or sexism, but was given its own name, symptomatically, only 15 years ago, namely speciesism. Power is the key to animal experimentation, on the industrial, university, legislative and individual level. There is a growing public concern about animals being used in experiments, which must be taken into account by animal experimenters, regulation authorities and politicians alike. The question of animal rights is a political issue with wide-reaching implications for man and other animals, if animal experiments were reduced, replaced or totally abolished. The great number of animal experiments do not benefit mankind, only various groups of people, who for different reasons have an interest in experiments on animals being carried out. Would there be a bigger benefit to society as a whole, including man, other animals and nature--thus adopting an ecological view of the world--if experiments on animals were to cease? It is a fallacy to believe that the gains for medical treatment of people (or other animals) have been so great that it would in any way support the common argument from animal experimenters about the "necessity" of animal experimentation.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
authors.forename: B
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Carlsson
mesh_terms: D000826:Animal Testing Alternatives; D000827:Animal Welfare; D000818:Animals; D009014:Morals; D014824:Vivisection