Are animals really necessary in biomedical research?
- Details
-
Hits: 19564
ETHICS ASSIGNMENT
SEE VIDEOS BELOW:
This assignment is worth 25 points, so please make sure your response is worth 25
points. Please view all the videos posted. These will help you complete this
assignment. You are to answer the following questions in the discussion post, and
please make sure you reference information from the Code of Ethics, the Belmont
Report & the Nuremberg Code-
What events prompted the Belmont Report & the Nuremberg Code?
Henrietta Lacks and The Syphilis Experiment- Please be able to answer specifically,
how these cases violated ethical standards based on the APA guidelines outlined on
ethical principles. You can participate in providing your input on whether research
should be conducted on human and animal subjects. Before you answer this question,
make sure you visit the link from APA on why they must use animals in research. Have
you ever been involved in research conducted on humans or animals?
Ask yourself the following questions and respond in your discussion-
1. Are animals really necessary in biomedical research?
2. Isn’t animal research scientific fraud, since animals and humans are so
different?
3. Do laboratory animals suffer pain?
4. Are animals abused and mistreated?
5. Aren’t millions of stolen pets used in research?
6. What about the animals’ rights?
7. Why can't 'alternative' methods replace animal research? Why can’t computers
replace experiments on animals?
VIDEOS:
Henrietta Lacks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y38pgPY6Zq0
Syphilis Experiment
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9ay3RJhavI
Ethical Principals of Psychologists & Code of Conduct
http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/
The Belmont Report
https://videocast.nih.gov/pdf/ohrp_appendix_belmont_report_vol_2.pdf
THE NUREMBERG CODE
1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means
that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so
situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of
any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form
of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of
the elements of the subject matter involved, as to enable him to make an
understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that, before
the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject, there should
be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method
and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably
to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person, which may possibly come
from his participation in the experiment.
The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon
each individual who initiates, directs or engages in the experiment. It is a
personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with
impunity.
2. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of
society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and
unnecessary in nature.
3. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal
experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other
problem under study, that the anticipated results will justify the performance of
the experiment.
4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and
mental suffering and injury.
5. No experiment should be conducted, where there is an a priori reason to believe
that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments
where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.
6. The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the
humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.
7. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect
the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability, or
death.
8. The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The
highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the
experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.
9. During the course of the experiment, the human subject should be at liberty to
bring the experiment to an end, if he has reached the physical or mental state,
where continuation of the experiment seemed to him to be impossible. 10. During the
course of the experiment, the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the
experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the
good faith, superior skill and careful judgement required of him, that a
continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death
to the experimental subject. ["Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military
Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10", Vol. 2, pp. 181-182. Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1949.]
ORDER AN ORIGINAL PAPER NOW
