Conflicting thoughts on animal experimentation

[Thought Hammer]

---

Members do not see this ad.

** Sorry for the lengthy commentary on the issue. I have highlighted main points of the post in bold for convenience

I know that there are some threads on this issue already but I am really divided on this topic of animal experimentation. I feel hypocritical of my ambitions of pursuing veterinary science, since I agree that modern medicine would not be had it not been for animal research. It makes me wonder if a medical career is the right choice for me at times. I was hoping you guys could give some input on the matter and help me reassess my views on animal research. If you can refute any points of my arguments, please do!

Here are my conflicting thoughts:

Thoughts against animal research:

I wonder at times if we even have the right to pursue medicine. It's a bold claim but I think we can all agree modern medicine has given the 21st century man the role to play "God" in a sense. After millions of years of nature's intended course, humans have found ways to combat nature with technology... but should we? I might not be alive today had it not been for these breakthroughs from science. Millions of people would have lived short, painful lives were it not for science, but a part of me believes diseases are a part of nature to keep animals like humans in check.

With the development of things like transportation (i.e. cars & planes), agriculture, and medicine, we've been able to bypass nature and flourish world-wide. Now, we see consequences of global warming/damage to ecosystems, obesity/wastage of resources, and overpopulation. History has not shown much credibility on humans' actions, and I wonder if medicine is just another facet of this idea that humans are trying to control nature (I know, I hate that I sound like a hippie 🙁).

For animal research:

A part of me believes humans do have the capability of showing compassion & responsibility in their actions. This is obviously one of the reasons why I want to be a vet and help animals. For instance, many scientists have drawn the line on issues like cloning humans which begs the question of how far we are allowed to go for the sake of research. Especially in today's social world where disease is doubly viral and common, it's necessary for medicine to be practiced or else lead to a global pandemic. Though there have been gratuitous wars and many occasions of greed with humans, I am genuinely proud that many humans try to help each other whether by medicine or social acts of kindness; I believe it's perhaps the most unique and best quality of humans. If humans have shown responsibility in bioethics, surely there is promise on other societal issues, right?

Also, it's a noble sacrifice; since animals are being euthanized at clinics, might as well honor their deaths to a good cause.

Thanks for the feedback. I really appreciate it!

 

[sumstorm]

If you embrace the first statement, then you probably shouldn't go into medicine, or allow medical treatment on yourself, or use technology.

Since you are on a computer to write this, I somehow doubt you sincerly hold this belief. There are a lot of folks willing to say how we 'should' act, but very few who are willing to match their actions to their words. For me to live by the standards you are sharing in the first ideal, I would need to live a subsistance lifestyle (and some folks do) because just living in a home has displaced natural settings including animals, supporting phone/internet infrastructure has done the same, as is using vehicles or relieing on vehicles to transport goods.

As for your second statement, I would strongly disagree with major components of it, particularly that disease is doubly viral; I'd rather confront disease now than 100 years ago and many diseases have far better treatments now than even a decade or two ago. I'm also not sure how euthanasia is a noble sacrifice. Most animals euthanized at a clinic are not serving a greater purpose in their death. I personally don't see being the deliverer of a peaceful death as self-sacrificing (in my experience it is far easier than stomaching an animal suffering needlessly.) All scientists will have thier own line in the sand to guide their actions and others will agree or disagree. Every generation has it's controversies (in my child hood it was test-tube babies.)

I don't think these are things anyone can figure out for you. I embrace animals for use, but believe in conservation (vs preservation) of nature and of altered nature (I'm a big believer in the seed bank) and I do believe that humans will eventually cause their own demise, but I am not willing to life a subsistance life, so I embrace making the changes I can. Each year I set goals that bring my life and my ideals in greater harmony, whether that is growing my own food, or bike commuting, or driving a low fuel hybrid. I aspire to be a better person within the framework of modern society, and I try to influence others to do the same. I can't imagine there will be a point when I would turn my back on the use of medicine (I may not always be willing to embrace the latests and greatest.)

best wishes

 

[Chaco]

I'm not sure what exactly your views on "animal experimentation" are. The reasoning you posted seems broader to me, like you have a problem with the way humans do a lot of things, such as using medicine to treat conditions that might actually be useful in keeping the human population "in check." Do you have specific issues with animals being used for research? Are some types of research more troubling to you than others? Or do you actually have broader concerns about medicine in general?

 

[awaring1]

Are you talking about animal testing (testing the effects of human medications/products on animals) or animal research (sacrificing animals in research for the sake of advancing the field)? These are two completely different topics.

I personally worked at a vet school on one of their terminal research projects. It was supposed to be my dream job but it ended up being an emotional nightmare. The project required 27 horses, all of which were "sacrificed" at the end. I loved certain aspects of my job (pre and post-op physicals, watching surgery, helping with induction, etc.) but I soon began to bond with some of the animals and I would be almost brought to tears on a daily basis knowing that they would not be alive much longer. I had to leave the job before they started to put them down because I knew I couldn't emotionally handle it.

For a while, I thought this experience would deter me from the field. I was passionate about veterinary medicine and was thinking of going into research because I loved discovering new things. After speaking with a lot of professionals, I discovered that terminal research does not have to be a part of your career. The field I was in (orthopedics) is apparently very heavy with terminal projects so I decided I would try to focus more on repro. Babies are much more fun than bones anyway. 🙂

Anywho, I have no idea if this helped or answered any questions at all.

 

[that redhead]

I don't think you are articulating your views very well on animal experimentation. You talk a lot about what you dislike about humans but the only thing I see in regards to animals is "noble sacrifice". I agree with Sumstorm that if you think medicine is playing God or just an evil tool to advocate the already existing evils, veterinary medicine (or medicine in general) are not for you. There's a lot to be said about how life was a long time ago and how we are today. Sure, the population is exploding because we've made so many advances in so many science-based fields and sure, that is placing an enormous strain on the earth as a resource/commodity. But in all fairness, it isn't as though there is some Great Plan written out that we as humans aren't following; we're simply pursuing what we've created for ourselves. Some of it is awful and toxic and terrible. Some of it is good.

If you are against animal experimentation as a piece of that Evil Human Evolution puzzle, veterinary medicine isn't for you. There are studies that use unrelieved pain and/or distress and no one wants to do that kind of work just to cause the animals pain. That work is often disease work and without it, human AND animal lives would surely not be as well off. (As an aside, I don't like to think as humans as inherently better or more deserving than animals. I would like to experience for myself animals used in research more to investigate diseases within the species to help other animals, as well. But this doesn't negate or overwhelm the need for improving human quality of life.) If you truly advocate moving away from animal usage, focus your career goals on developing computerized software or robotics that somehow mimic the conditions of animal life. It sounds to me as though your viewpoints are not compatible with veterinary medicine at this point; not to say that you must become complacent, but maybe better understanding what animal usage entails and produces.

 

[Thought Hammer]

I'm sorry if my comments were not clear. Some of the analogies are not perfect and might have been interpreted as gross exaggerations such as the "God complex" example. By that statement, I just meant we have had the unique ability to combat nature.
@sumstorm I meant that animal experimentation for medical research is a noble sacrifice (as opposed to just euthanizing stray animals due to overpopulation).
@Chaco, The statement regarding diseases keeping people "in check" seemed brash, but I was trying to say that in terms of ecosystems in biology, aren't microbes and viruses and such a necessary part of evolution and to balance the ecosystem? I might have made it sound like we should just cut medicine and let tons of people die and sorry for that.

Thanks for the feedback, a bit painful but definitely necessary. I truly do want to pursue my ambition of helping animals as a veterinarian. I was really hoping the veterinary community could help convince me to rid myself of my current thoughts that go against animal experimentation. There is the option that I could go into fields that do not involve the use of animal experimentation, but I still find it hypocritical to practice modern medicine while avoiding the issue of experimentation.

Thank you again for the suggestions and retorts. If you feel like you want to voice your thoughts, please post! I am still fairly new to the field of medicine and am consequently a bit ignorant of how things really are.

 

[sumstorm]

If you do not believe that domesticated animals exist for the use of humans, whether that is as pampered pets, research models, or food, you should NOT go into vet med. That is my opinion.

If you think that animals, while in our care, should have appropriate husbandry and essential needs met and/or exceeded, vet med might be for you.

However, no matter how you look at it, even if you are doing the very best thing for a given animal at a given time, you will experiment on an animal at some point during your education. I know some folks will protest that, but your first surgery is an experiment with the hypothesis being that you can complete the process and recover the animal successfully. That completly ignores all the animals that are sacrificed for past knowledge, and that is if you go to a school that doesn't use cadavers.

Having said all that, all of the current research at our school has protocols to protect the day-to-day welfare of the animals, include relief from pain.

As for combating nature, a lot of that depends on how you see yourself in relation to nature. I took a class in environmental history which was fascinating. One idea we talked about was being close to nature. We read writings from the early 1800's. One was from a fur trapper, the other was from a social elite who created a victorian garden. The fur trapper talked about his routes, and the daily conditions, and changes in the river and weather. The gardner talked about how close she was to nature as she designed these gardens. Who was closer to nature? Who thought they were closer to nature?

Most animals combat nature. Prarie dogs have call systems to alert each other to predators to evade a natural death. Gulls change their eating patterns from social to solo and back depending on abundance. Albatross pair bond with the same sex and manage to have offspring. Humans have been incredibly successful, as have rats, cats, dogs, ants, some birds, and cockroaches.

We have gone to extremes. Is it a problem? probably. I cringe when I hear families preaching about quiver theory. but I have options; live by the ideal (subsistence), live in the frame I am in to the best of my ability, devote myself to a cause but without fully embracing what I say in actions (PETA folks who own pets). You are the only one who can address that.

Maybe you need to stop thinking in grandiose, god infused terms, and start being specific about what you object to. I object to close-confinement factory farming. I don't object to meat, or farming, or even some of the economic decisions, but I do object to methods of getting there. So I work to promote what I do believe in, change what I dislike.

I am sure there are things that can be improved in research (I'd like our research pigs to have better enrichment) but I don't object to appropriate research at all. I can promote what I want improved (by helping educate researchers that lower cortisol levels will improve their research) but if I think they shouldn't be allowed to do any research, I need to stay out of that arena.