Article info
PDFCommentary
A flimsy case for the use of non-human primates in research: a reply to Arnason
- Correspondence to Catia Faria, Centre for Ethics, Politics and Society, ILCH - Universidade do Minho, 4710-057 Braga, Portugal; catiaxfaria{at}gmail.com
Citation
A flimsy case for the use of non-human primates in research: a reply to Arnason
Publication history
- Received July 31, 2017
- Accepted September 27, 2017
- First published October 14, 2017.
Online issue publication
April 26, 2018
Article Versions
- Previous version (26 April 2018).
- You are viewing the most recent version of this article.
Request permissions
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.
Copyright information
© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.
Other content recommended for you
- The ethical justification for the use of non-human primates in research: the Weatherall report revisited
- Objections still fail: a response to Faria
- Non-human primates: the appropriate subjects of biomedical research?
- Ethical issues when modelling brain disorders innon-human primates
- Genetic enhancement, post-persons and moral status: a reply to Buchanan
- The biomedical enhancement of moral status
- Driven to extinction? The ethics of eradicating mosquitoes with gene-drive technologies
- Infanticide and moral consistency
- Why is it possible to enhance moral status and why doing so is wrong?
- Are those who subscribe to the view that early embryos are persons irrational and inconsistent? A reply to Brock