Kyra Mills

Ethical Position Paper

5/3/17

Non-human Organism Testing

Non-human organisms should be allowed to govern their own lives, but

this should be regulated within our society. In other words, if a person or

multiple people benefit from a non-human organisms exploitation, it should

be allowed.

Animals have been experimented on throughout history to expand human

knowledge (Animal Testing, 2017). Animal testing has been used in studies in

order to hypothesize effects of a substance before studies are carried further.

The use of animal testing has prevented human exposure to harmful

chemicals or other items (Garattini, S., & Grignaschi, G., 2017). This means

of study has aided in the development of scientific knowledge. Dr. Galen, a

Greek physician, conducted tests on animals to better understand anatomy

Another example animal testing has been used to benefit others and expand

scientific knowledge is by testing procedures on a certain ailment or injury

before a patient is placed under the care of the of the doctors. An Arab

physician used animals to test out surgical procedures in the 1100s (Hajar,

R., 2011). Knowledge has been developed drastically because of these

animal studies. A widely known instance of an animal study is space

exploration. During the 1950s, the British launched a satellite into space.

However, instead of deploying humans to space, a dog was deployed

1
(Barnett, N., 2013). The deployment of animals to space ensures the safety

of humans before they deploy (Writer, C. C., N.d). The exploitation of these

animal has benefitted society greatly; without sending a dog to space or

performing tests and procedures on animals, we would be unsure of what the

effect of zero gravity on humans would be or the toxicity of a certain

chemical. Due to widespread organizations, such as PETA, advocating that

animals have their rights to life and the extinguishment of pain, animals are

now viewed as a victim towards cruelty and human greed (Scruton, R.,

2000).

In reality, we heavily rely on animals. A common instance is

consumption; we consume animal or animal products regularly. A common

argument form PETA is that the slaughter of animals for food is cruel,

however, humans need meat; our bodies were designed to consume meat

(Araki, K., 2017). Hunting, another instance of animal exploitation that raises

controversy, benefits the economy, community, and people. Hunting

benefits, the community and people because it controls over population

(n.d.). Hunting is also beneficial to the economy as it attracts tourism. In

places such as Wyoming, where animal populations are the most fit, such as

the pronghorn, White-tailed deer hunting is encouraged (Muposhi, V. K., et

al., 2017). The last argument towards non-human exploitation, is that plants

are animals as well; however, plants, such as fruits and vegetables are a

main food group needed in our diets. We need meat, animal products, and

plants in our diets in order to get the nutrients we need. A study conducted

2
found protein, dairy, and fruit and vegetable intake contributed to higher

energy levels (Auestad, N., et al., 2015, June 7). All of the above

circumstances have been used to benefit people and/ or persons and should

be legal uses for non-human studies and exploitation.

Some oppositions to animal and non-human exploitation that might raise

controversy are the rights animals have to their own lives, including safety

and happiness. Animal Testing has raised controversy because it is seen as

harmful to the animals and the validity of scientific findings in animal studies

are questionable (Opposing Viewpoints in Context - Document. (2017).

Hunting may also raise dispute amongst people as it is perceived as a luxury

and may not benefit people or communities. There are many ways one can

argue that killing of an innocent animal is frowned upon, however, one

instance of this controversy is that communities are not benefitted from

hunting. Fox hunting, a popular sport in Great Britain, is said to segregate

social classes (THE DEBATE ABOUT FOX HUNTING - HU Berlin., n.d.).

Non-human organism should not have a right to their own lives if it is

used for the benefit of others, such as practicing surgical procedures before

operating on a patient. The use of non-human exploitation should be

regulated, to ensure equality but should not be outlawed because of its

cruelty; the basic principle of equality does not require equal or identical

treatment; it requires equal consideration (Why Plant Rights? Pearls., 2017).

The values constituting my position on this topic are as follows: expanded

Utalitarianism, so medical researchers may use animals to ensure safety and

3
happiness of their patients; Indirect Duty, so livestock may be bred for food

but deserve to be handled humanely; Beneficience, so people benefit from

the nutritional value of meat and plants and the safety of animal research;

Conscience 1, so researchers still have a responsibility to ensure safety;

Conscience 2, so researchers choose to analyze animal behavior before

operating on humans; and Conscience 3, so researchers may ensure safety

of many others.

References

Animal testing. (2017, April 30). Retrieved May 04, 2017, from
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_testing1

Araki, K. (2017). Why All Humans Need to Eat Meat for Health. Breaking
Muscle. Retrieved 7 March 2017, from
https://breakingmuscle.com/fuel/why-all-humans-need-to-eat-meat-for-
health
Auestad, N., Hurley, J. S., Fulgoni, V. L., & Schweitzer, C. M. (2015, June 7).
Contribution of Food
Groups to Energy and Nutrient Intakes in Five Developed Countries.
Retrieved May 04,
2017, from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4488804/

Barnett, N. (2013). RUSSIA WINS SPACE RACE. Media History, 19(2), 182-
195.
doi:10.1080/13688804.2013.791419

4
Garattini, S., & Grignaschi, G. (2017). Animal testing is still the best way to
find new treatments
for patients. European Journal Of Internal Medicine, 3932-35.
doi:10.1016/j.ejim.2016.11.013

Hajar, R. (2011). Animal Testing and Medicine. Retrieved May 04, 2017, from
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3123518/

Muposhi, V. K., Gandiwa, E., Makuza, S. M., & Bartels, P. (2017). ECOLOGICAL,
PHYSIOLOGICAL,
GENETIC TRADE-OFFS AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS OF TROPHY
HUNTING AS A
CONSERVATION TOOL: A NARRATIVE REVIEW. JAPS: Journal Of Animal &
Plant
Sciences, 27(1), 1-14.

(n.d.). Retrieved May 04, 2017, from

http://www.hudson.edu/custom_users/mmtech/16893/16893/Pros_and_Cons.
html

Opposing Viewpoints in Context - Document. (2017). Ic.galegroup.com.

Retrieved 7 March 2017,
Fromhttp://ic.galegroup.com/ic/ovic/ReferenceDetailsPage/DocumentToolsPor
tletWindow?
displayGroupName=Reference&jsid=e091785646f639f92af0616ad5a2c5ca&
action=2&catId=&documentId=GALE
%7CEJ1529600102&u=gotitans&zid=6523f9ba22a6b0ca8371921748157331

Scruton, R. (2000). Animal Rights and Wrongs. Retrieved May 03, 2017, from
https://books.google.com/books?
hl=en&lr=&id=1NCg4oAkrZUC&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=what%2Bare
%2Banimal%2Brights&ots=5ShFUll65h&sig=9u5so__uhZmOavfKErVD-
wxtBXY#v=onepage&q=what%20are%20animal%20rights&f=false

THE DEBATE ABOUT FOX HUNTING - HU Berlin. (n.d.). Retrieved May 4, 2017,
from https://www.bing.com/cr?
IG=6BAD731D17B54535B5B6347A6FE798A7&CID=0FFBE9E4F02E67CD054
5E39CF1BE66C8&rd=1&h=pLTWHwF2Tkc5mqeultE66K7hMZ06iAhRJgLpzV9
A0wI&v=1&r=https%3a%2f%2fwww.gbz.hu-berlin.de%2fma-british-studies
%2fdistinguished-ma-theses%2fdownloads%2fpdf
%2fDagmarOrendi_MasterThesis.pdf&p=DevEx,5033.

5
Why Plant Rights? Pearls. (2017). Jperla.com. Retrieved 7 March 2017, from
http://www.jperla.com/blog/post/why-plant-rights-2 11
Writer, C. C. (n.d.). Why Do We Send Animals to Space? Retrieved May 04,
2017, from http://www.space.com/33823-why-do-we-send-animals-to-
space.html