Some people say these experiments are cruel, and animals should not be used. While others say they would rather see these experiments done on animals instead of humans themselves. b. Thesis statement- Animal experimentation for medical purposes should be carried out, instead of scientist performing human tests. c. Main points- My main points are; medical advances for humans due to animal experiments, medical advances for animals due to animal experimentation, how the animals are really treated, laws that are enforced, and why animals are used. 2.
So why is it that we would say that the possibility of genetic engineering being used for something less urgent than preventing a life-threatening illness is a reason to not allow it to be used at all? I think it might be a very good thing to take a few steps down the slope. Genetic engineering of this type is in its infancy, but you could easily foresee a time when we could address all kinds of not life-threatening but still bothersome conditions. So I totally agree with the procedure, if we could free people from things on the order of allergies or myopia, which would be an enormous benefit to
We will not make them suffer long painful deaths. Ethical treatment of animals can be solved using the deontology theory. “Deontology focuses on what we are obligated to do as rational moral agents. It is particularly important to see that the deontologist does not say that actions do not have consequences; rather, the deontologist insists that actions should not be evaluated on the basis of the action's consequences (Mossler, 2010).“ One example of the deontology theory in action is your livestock is being attacked by a wild animal. In efforts to protect your livestock you shoot and kill the wild animal.
A further strength of measuring observable behaviours is that data is easier to quantify and collect making carrying out statistical tests easier. A weakness of behaviourism is that many of behaviourist theories have come from being tested on animals; for example skinners experiments on operant conditioning using pigeons. This makes the results less valid because humans are so much more complex than animals; animals only rely on basic natural instincts: food, reproduction, survival. So the research may not actually be applicable to humans. However, carrying out research on animals means that important theories can be tested that would otherwise be too wrong to test on humans.
Argument Analysis: Animal Liberation Peter Singer’s “Animal Liberation” gave me a whole new perspective on animals and the way humans have been treating them. It is a convincing piece because it provides information that you would not have known about animals and the way they are being treated. I did not think about the animals and how their life was like before they were prepared as food for the people. Singer argues that since animals cannot speak for themselves we the people decide to speak for them but we do not know exactly what they want. It is true that we do things to animals that we are not for certain how are they are affected by it.
Lewin’s theory suggests infection, trauma, and genetic diseases should be left untreated in order to help the human body fight and respond naturally; doctors should only intervene if necessary. Lewin also states that these symptoms may not be what they seem. Instead of viewing symptoms such as coughs, fevers, and illnesses as a weakness to the human body, Darwinian medicine sees them as a method of evolving. The Darwinian medicine process would allow the body to become stronger and more adaptive to toxins and harmful infections without the help of modern medicine. It is possible that the human body has a natural defense and can heal naturally from infection, trauma, and genetic diseases.
Vaccines prevent illness by priming the immune system to react powerfully to specific disease-causing agents, but in this case, the inflammatory component of such a response can cause more harm than good. 4 Chlamydia refurbish the cell’s entry vacuoles to avoid lysosomes, enabling the bacteria to reproduce freely while separated physically from the rest of the infected call. If the lysosomes cannot produce bits of the bacteria to present on the cell surface, subsequently the T-cell
With biotechnology, there are almost no limits to what can be achieved by medicine. However, the development of technology is often paused, based on our ethical attitudes. Is it, for example, Is it okay to sort out the disabled or specific aesthetic qualities you do not like? Is it wrong to experiment with fetuses, even if it can save lives? In the case of biotechnology, many imagine the worst possible scenarios that the subject could cause.
Until recently, studies have been conducted on primates and other animals of noteworthy importance only because they have similar learning and thinking patterns to humans. In this paper, I shall describe how animals can play a major factor in research and future innovation compared to normal studies on humans. Of course, I’m against the harmful testing on animals sense some studies can be very unethical. Though, tests these days aren’t allowed to endanger the participants and those participating need to know the risks before agreeing to be a part of a study. Significance of Animals in Psychology Despite two historical normality’s between the study of humans and the study of animals, the amount of research stressed on animals is lacking unfortunately.
Opinions in society differ over whether there should be any genetic manipulation of humans. Some people believe curing diseases such as cystic fibrosis and other genetically disabling diseases should be considered ethical and acceptable, but advancing human intelligence, strength and personal characteristics is not. Others believe that genetic manipulation of humans of any form is unethical and therefore should not be done while others believe it is advantageous and advancements should be pursued. One of the main reasons people are opposed to genetic manipulation of human beings is because it could go wrong. It is very hard to determine all the potential effects of gene therapy.