
	Where results make sense

Topic: Vivisection and experimentation debate

Related Topics

Animal welfare

Animal rights

Animal Welfare Act

Animal testing

Huntingdon Life Sciences

Moral absolutism

Ethical relativism

Moral universalism

Objectivist philosophy

Ethics

David Hume

Divine command theory

Immanuel Kant

Jeremy Bentham

John Stuart Mill

In the News (Fri 11 Dec 09)

Northern Trust

Marvin Harrison

Peter Chernin

Gary Locke

Match Play

Penelope Cruz

Mickey Rourke

AR Rahman

Danny Boyle

Hugh Jackman

	Vivisection - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
		Comparatively recent (mainly since the 19th century) controversy regarding vivisection has centred around moral questions of whether the benefits of animal experimentation outweigh the suffering inflicted.
		Vivisection has long been practised on human beings, and was a prerequisite for the development of the field of medicine.
		Herophilos, the "father of anatomy" and founder of the first medical school in Alexandria, was described by the church leader Tertullian as having vivisected at least 600 live prisoners.
	en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Vivisection (588 words)

	Vivisection - Encyclopedia.WorldSearch (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-03)
		Many dictionaries and encyclopedias now use the term "vivisection" to mean any kind of harmful animal experiment, whether it entails cutting or surgery or not, although those who experiment on animals dislike this trend as they feel that "vivisection" is an emotive term.
		Comparatively recent (mainly since the 19th century) controversy regarding vivisection has centered around moral questions of whether benefits, perceived or actual, of animal experimentation outweigh what suffering is thereby inflicted.
		Opponents to vivisection claim that the law often fails to protect animals being vivisected http://vivisection-absurd.org.uk/abs06p2.html, point to undercover investigations to show that these animals do suffer http://www.vivisection-absurd.org.uk/xexpose.html and point out that even aside from the invasive procedures they go through the animals may suffer from being kept in inadequate living conditions.
	encyclopedia.worldsearch.com /vivisection.htm (773 words)

	Vivisection and experimentation debate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
		Vivisection means cutting the live body, generally without anesthesia, though the word is now used to mean any experiment on a living animal.
		In 1655, physiologist Edmund O'Meara is recorded as saying that "the miserable torture of vivisection surely places the body in an unnatural state." O'Meara thus expresses one of the chief scientific objections, that the pain of the vivisected subject will interfere with the accuracy of the results.
		Experimenters are of the opinion that this particular objection to animal experimentation is invalid because the final test of any medication is a clinical trial on human subjects.
	www.wikipedia.org /wiki/Vivisection_and_experimentation_debate (1270 words)

	Vivisection: Just the facts... (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-03)
		Many dictionaries and encyclopedias now use the term "vivisection" to mean any kind of harmful animal experiment, whether it entails cutting or surgery or not, although those who experiment on animals dislike this trend as they feel that "vivisection" is an emotive term (Croce 1991).
		Opponents to vivisection claim that the law often fails to protect animals being vivisected, point to undercover investigations to show that these animals do suffer and point out that even aside from the invasive procedures they go through the animals may suffer from being kept in inadequate living conditions.
		One might therefore assume that in modern civilized societies, vivisection on humans is strictly taboo (A prejudice (especially in Polynesia and other South Pacific islands) that prohibits the use or mention of something because of its sacred nature).
	www.absoluteastronomy.com /encyclopedia/v/vi/vivisection.htm (643 words)

	Animal testing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
		Supporters and opponents often debate the various ethical issues surrounding the practuce and some question whether using animal models is good or bad science.
		In deciding whether to grant a licence, the Home Office refers to the Act's cost-benefit analysis, which is defined as "the likely adverse effects on the animals concerned against the benefit likely to accrue as a result of the programme to be specified in the licence" (Section 5(4)).
		The British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection (BUAV) estimates that 100 million animals are experimented on around the world every year, 10–11 million of them in the European Union [25] (pdf) and 1,101,958 in the United States in 2004 [26] (pdf p.3).
	www.wikipedia.org /wiki/Animal_testing (5131 words)

	Vivisection
		More recently, the term has been applied broadly, especially by animal rights activists, to any type of experimentation in which animals are injured, with or without literal vivisection.
		Animal rights advocates attempt to use vivisection to recast the terms of the discourse to favor their position, employing vivisection as a veiled barb.
		But provided that they are approved by ethical review, are carried out in an approved manner that minimizes pain and longer term health risks to the subject, and are only carried out with the subject's consent, such procedures would not be considered to exploit the subject, and would then be morally relatively uncontroversial.
	en.mcfly.org /Vivisection (545 words)

	vivisection - Hutchinson encyclopedia article about vivisection (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-03)
		Used originally to mean experimental surgery or dissection practised on a live subject, the term is often used by antivivisection campaigners to include any experiment on animals, surgical or otherwise.
		Only three British companies were still holding testing permits for animal-tested cosmetics in 1998, and the number of animals used in such tests in 1997 was 1,319 out of the 2.6 million tests that took place overall.
		This information should not be considered complete, up to date, and is not intended to be used in place of a visit, consultation, or advice of a legal, medical, or any other professional.
	encyclopedia.farlex.com /vivisection (271 words)

	Vivisection (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-03)
		It is claimed that animal rights advocates attempt to use the word "vivisection" to recast the terms of the discourse on animal research to favor their position.
		The term has been applied broadly to any type of experimentation in which animals are injured, with or without cutting or surgery.
		Opponents to vivisection claim that the law can fail to protect animals being vivisected [1] and point to undercover investigations showing that animals sometimes do suffer [1].
	www.abitabouteverything.com /files/v/vi/vivisection.html (659 words)

	Americans for Medical Progress (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-03)
		These conditions were that the experimentation was for a serious medical research purpose, that the animals used were rodents or similar species, and that there was little or no suffering involved.
		The media tend to focus on the question of the necessity of animal experimentation, and representatives of the scientific community are usually happy to debate this point because the evidence strongly supports their position.
		Unlike the debate about the necessity of using animals in research, where the facts are clearly on our side, making it possible to give an unequivocal answer, our position on animal suffering is less clear.
	www.ampef.org /Issues/Issues.cfm?ID=217&c=77 (1260 words)

	Society&Animal Forum - Society & Animals Journal
		Despite the literature on both sides of the animal experimentation debate often tending towards the absolutist and polemical, the animal activists interviewed by Herzog admitted that there were many areas of moral ambiguity in their view of humans' relations with animals.
		Given the nature of this organization, it must be borne in mind that the attitudes of this group of respondents are not necessarily representative of animal researchers in general.
		Perhaps these are implicit assumptions of the pro- experimentation position, but ones which the animal researchers do not regard as effective or useful "arguments" for their beliefs.
	www.psyeta.org /sa/sa3.1/paul.html (5695 words)

	Animal rights (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-03)
		The animal rights debate (much like the abortion debate) is therefore marred by the difficulty that its proponents search for simple, clear cut distinctions on which to base unambiguous moral and political judgements, even though the biological realities of the problem present no hard and fast "fl-and-white" boundaries on which such distinctions could be based.
		In other words, even if a clear consensus existed on what the appropriate criteria for animal rights should be, it would nevertheless be impossible in many cases to give a satisfactory categorical "yes or no" answer to the question whether a particular species of animal should or should not have recognized rights.
		Due to the negative publicity caused by direct action (the FBI has announced that it considers the Animal Liberation Front and Earth Liberation Front the number one terrorist groups native to the United States), many animal rights organisations denounce its use in advancing the animal rights cause.
	hallencyclopedia.com /Animal_rights (3586 words)

	Society&Animal Forum - Society & Animals Journal
		Although active, organized opposition to vivisection has existed for well over a century, only recently has the issue of experimentation upon nonhuman animals moved from a place on the fringes of social debate to the mainstream of public discussion.
		For partisans on either side of the debate, the influence of source status on attitude formation is unlikely to be of consequence.
		Supporters of continued animal experimentation are significantly more likely than opponents to be presented as professionals or experts in the field, which may suggest a higher level of credibility for pro_experimentation arguments.
	www.psyeta.org /sa/sa6.3/kruse.html (2561 words)

	Animal Experimentation (Vivisection) Unscientific: Animal Testing Impedes Medical Progress
		Vivisection experiments fall into three general categories: attempts to test the toxicity of drugs and substances (Animal Testing); attempts to study human disease (Experimental Research on Animals); and attempts to teach medical students human anatomy and surgical techniques (Dissection and Practice Surgery).
		Experimental research on animals is the attempt to recreate human disease in animals in order to study it.
		This is in sharp contrast with the unscientific practice of vivisection, which involves the study of non-human animals in unnatural laboratory conditions with artificially inflicted disease.
	www.healingcancernaturally.com /animal-testing-vivisection.html (8157 words)

	Encyclopedia: Vivisection and experimentation debate
		The British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection is a pressure group based near Highbury Corner in North London, United Kingdom that campaigns peacefully against vivisection.
		SPEAK is a British animal rights campaign that aims to end animal experimentation and vivisection in the UK.
		The campaign was born out of Stop Primate Experimentation at Cambridge (SPEAC), [1] a campaign set up to oppose the construction at the University of Cambridge of a new primate testing facility...
	www.nationmaster.com /encyclopedia/Vivisection-and-experimentation-debate (1221 words)

	Bad Science or Bad Argument
		In their reply, the NEAVS failed to take the opportunity to explain why animal experimentation might be immoral, but rather pointed to the failures of animal experimentation, claimed that it puts humans at risk, and claimed that money is the primary reason why animal experiments continue (Capaldo and Cramer).
		Engaging in a debate about the validity of animal experimentation assumes that it is acceptable to use animals in experiments; one implicitly concedes that if the research is valid, then the research is justified.
		This is precisely the strategy of animal experimentation defense groups; they try to divert attention from the immorality of the act by pointing to the benefits of the act.
	www.vegetus.org /essay/aexp.htm (9377 words)

	AAPN.org - Asian Animal Protection Network
		At the moment the public believes that vivisection is an unpleasant necessity, the ends justifying the means.
		Vivisection is a social evil because if it advances human knowledge, it does so at the expense of human character.
		They claim that, despite the wholesale bloody experimentation on animals, the only real proof of the drugs found by the chemists or the operating techniques suggested by the experimentation on animals must be, in the end, verified by trying them on human subjects.
	www.aapn.org /experimentanimals.html (2516 words)

	The Science Behind Why Animal Experimentation Cannot Help Humans
		Animal experimenters frequently disavow that they are trying to cure human disease and insist that they are simply adding facts to the world of knowledge.
		Animal experimenters will insist that animals, notwithstanding their lack of isomorphism and inability to be CAMs are still necessary because without animals researchers could not evaluate the drug or procedure in an intact system.
		Many times we have debated researchers with a vested interest in animal experimentation that state that there is nothing that would convince them of the inadequacy of the paradigm.
	www.curedisease.com /Science.html (7417 words)

	bmj.com Rapid Responses for Greek et al., 324 (7331) 236
		It seems that this debate has really missed a contribution from seriously ill patients, their carers, and relatives who want to safeguard future medical progress and realise that goal relies on some animal studies.
		Debates have been 'stage-managed' to focus on animal welfare/rights issues as opposed to scientific/medical arguments.
		But I expect, unless vivisection is abolished, too many of them are quite happy with the status quo or just too busy to question it.
	www.bmj.com /cgi/eletters/324/7331/236/a (10340 words)

	Definition of Vivisection
		Opponents to vivisection claim that the law often fails to protect animals being vivisected [1] (http://vivisection-absurd.org.uk/abs06p2.html), point to undercover investigations to show that these animals do suffer [2] (http://www.vivisection-absurd.org.uk/xexpose.html) and point out that even aside from the invasive procedures they go through the animals may suffer from being kept in inadequate living conditions.
		Vivisections at Kyushu University Hospital in 1945 (http://www.fukuokahistory.com/live/content/articles/15/)
		"Vivisection - Absurd", a website that argues that vivisection is cruel, unscientific and a danger to human health (http://www.vivisection-absurd.org.uk)
	www.wordiq.com /definition/Vivisection (785 words)

	Vivisection and experimentation debate (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-03)
		Focusing on the cruelty issues, SPCAs have been formed in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, America and other countries.
		Medical researchers experimenting on animals often express a wish that the general public had a greater understanding of the issues involved and are at some pains to point out that every care is taken in safeguarding the welfare of the animals experimented upon.
		4) That clinical conditions are necessary for accurate observation of the experimental model.
	vivisection-and-experimentation-debate.ask.dyndns.dk (1294 words)

	DLRM - Books
		After years of himself practising animal experimentation and vivisection, Pietro Croce concludes that the traditional reliance on these techniques is scientifically misplaced.
		It is a strong statement, not only on the question of animal experimentation, but also on our attitudes to and treatment of 'others' on this planet: individual humans, sexes, races, religions, animals, plants, nature, the whole environment.
		It is long past time that we closed the book on vivisection and turned our minds and our talents to the task of halting the apparently relentless increase in illness and promoting good health.
	www.dlrm.org /books.htm (1253 words)

	Vivisection (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-03)
		Rat in stereotaxic restraining device about to undergo brain surgery.Etymologically, vivisection refers to the dissection or, more generally, any cutting or surgery upon, a living animal, typically for the purpose of physiological or pathological scientific investigation.
		In some extreme cases, the test subjects may include human beings.
		Category:Animal experimentation Category:Holocaust Category:Activism de:Vivisektion he:ניסויים בבעלי חיים nl:Vivisectie pl:Wiwisekcja zh:活体解剖
	vivisection.ask.dyndns.dk (725 words)

	BBC NEWS \| Have Your Say \| Is animal testing justified?
		Just a bit of information to add to the debate: I recently took a college course on endocrinology, and the professor spent a whole lecture and a half talking about stress in lab rats and mice.
		Precautions are taken to ensure that the animals are kept under conditions that minimize stress, because elevated levels of stress hormones have effects on all sorts of other things like immunity and cognitive function.
		However are those that totally against using animals for any experiment going to put their money where their mouth is and refuse (for themselves or love ones) any product or medicine that has been tested in such a way or reliant on methods or knowledge which have been developed using animals.
	news.bbc.co.uk /1/hi/talking_point/3735199.stm (1759 words)

	spiked-science \| Article \| Vivisection: testing the debate
		The report says that more should be done to fund and promote 'alternative methods' through a process known as the Three Rs - the reduction, refinement and replacement of animal experiments.
		But what is most needed today is an unequivocal defence of animal experimentation.
		These medical advances would not have been won, or would have been introduced at great human cost, had it not been for animal experimentation.
	www.spiked-online.com /articles/00000006D9A9.htm (972 words)

	Society&Animals Forum Suggested Reading List
		The lobby for animal experimentation consists of breeders and suppliers, equipment companies, drug companies, universities, and grant-giving groups, all of which exert great pressure on the FDA and other government agencies.
		Few arguments in biomedical experimentation have stirred such heated debate in recent years as those raised by animal research.
		Instead of arguing for either view, she thoughtfully explores the ground between the extremes, and convincingly makes the case for public policy reforms that serve to improve the welfare of laboratory animals without jeopardizing scientific endeavor.
	www.psyeta.org /booklist.html (4733 words)

Try your search on: Qwika (all wikis)