The highly controversial topic of animal rights vs using animals in laboratory research has divided and will continue to divide opinions in the foreseeable future. Though this topic hasn't really gained much traction in my part of the world - because of some sentiments - but in the Western world, it's a very touchy issue.
Last night I was reviewing a voice call where a resident called some wildlife removal company. The woman was literally begging them to come over and help her remove a raccoon she suspected was messing up her attic. I couldn't help but let out a wry smile because I know if it was here that raccoon would be hunted and killed for its meat in no time. But then, different ideologies, eh.
Honestly, animal research has been a blessing to humanity. Not without its problems - like all research, anyway - what we've gained from animal testing has been immense. Similarities between the DNA of some animals and humans has helped us to study and understand diseases, and then go on to develop vaccines, medications and treatments to combat them.
Also, whenever new pharmaceutical drugs are synthesized, animal testing helps to study its efficacy and, importantly, dosage to be applied before being tested on humans. Admittedly, animals die in the process as the dosage is tweaked till perfection is struck. But, would we have preferred that these raw products be tested on humans till they are perfect for commercialization?
Animal testing has helped humans to study complex biological processes that may hitherto take months and years. Also, immediate availability means these studies can be done in controlled environments without being rushed. With this, we understand pathways, behavioural and psychological developments without losing way too much. Only a daredevil scientist will keep a human in a cold room for years all in the name of research.
So, better animals than humans, right?
That is where the problem is. Animal rights activists rightly believe we are infringing and maltreating animals simply because they can't defend themselves against us. Arguments about the stress, pain and discomfort these animals go through during the testing phase will never go away. Not to mention that some of them eventually die while being tested on.
Also, advancement in technology in the form of computer simulations and in vitro testinga has only cranked up the volume of activists. If simulations can be used to predict and conclude on the pathway of a particular pharmaceutical drug, why not perfect it to determine its dosage and application instead of sacrificing defenceless animals? Trust me, animal rights activists can be very persuasive.
Despite all the arguments, court cases and counterarguments, is there a way forward in the battle to protect the animal kingdom from cruel animal testing?
Organizations like the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee and the International Council for Laboratory Animal Science have been in the forefront of finding a path where experiments are still being carried out but with few animals bearing the brunt. The 3Rs principle of Replacement, Reduction and Refinement that was postulated some 50 years ago has a clear pathway from whence we can move forward.
Conclusively, is it not hypocritical that we slaughter animals like hen and turkey for fun, extract milks out of cows without a care in the world if the cows want to be milked and take wool off sheep without a single pity only to go ballistic about maltreatment of some other animals for research purposes? Are some animals greater than the others?
