Animal use in medical research is widely accepted on the basis that it may help to save human lives and improve their quality of life. Recently, however, objections have been made specifically to the use of animals in scientific investigation of human obesity. This paper discusses two arguments for the view that this form of animal use, unlike some other forms of animal-based medical research, cannot be defended. The first argument leans heavily on the notion that people themselves are responsible for developing obesity and so-called ‘lifestyle’ diseases; the second involves the claim that animal studies of obesity's causes and therapies distract attention from preventive efforts. Drawing on both empirical data and moral reasoning, we argue that the relevant attributions of responsibility and claims about distraction are not plausible, and that, therefore, there is no reason to single out the use of animals in obesity research as especially problematic.
- Animal Experimentation
- Research Ethics
- Public Policy
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Reforming the politics of animal research
- Government sets out plans to advance the use of the 3Rs
- Is there a place for animal experiments?
- Animal research nexus: a new approach to the connections between science, health and animal welfare
- Support for use of animals in research
- Alternatives to animal experimentation
- 3Rs missing: animal research without scientific value is unethical
- Benefiting animals through animal research
- Improving debate on the use of animals in research
- Will Hong Kong ever have an ethical research system?