humanespot.org humanespot.org humanespot.org
 
 

Animal Research and Demonstrating Animal Sentience

 
| |

How should animal advocates react to animal-based scientific experiments if we think the findings can help animals? Should we speak out against the studies and refuse to cite them or should we make use of them with the intent and hope that the animals will not have suffered in vain? It’s a particularly relevant question for HRC because we cover such a breadth of research studies in our HumaneSpot.org database, which includes well over a hundred public opinion and behavior studies that relate to animal testing.

---------------------

One item we recently added to the database prompted this discussion among the HRC team. Specifically, researchers from Canada and the Netherlands recently published an article entitled, “Coding of Facial Expressions of Pain in the Laboratory Mouse.” As the name implies, the study involved intentionally harming mice and coding their responses to create a “mouse grimace scale.” HRC’s internal dialog highlighted the pluses and minuses of including such research in our database.

On one hand, the underlying study is obviously deplorable and intensely cruel. On the other hand, making animal advocates aware of the research can be useful by providing an example of the inhumane nature of animal research as well as the sentience of mice. This latter point was the clincher for HRC; we chose to include the research because it makes abundantly clear the level to which mice are sentient and capable of pain and suffering despite being used extensively in laboratory research.

However, we also decided that database entries like this probably warrant providing a disclaimer to ensure that HRC’s position on animal research is clear. Especially with a name like the “Humane Research Council,” which of course refers to social marketing research for animals, we thought it best to avoid any confusion. Following is the language we’re using:

    Note that this research study is based at least in part on experiments on animals. HRC does not condone or endorse any animal research; we post this item (and others like it) with the hope that these findings can assist advocates in their work to help animals. For a description of how we select items for the HumaneSpot.org database, please click here.

We’d like to hear your thoughts. Going back to our original question, how should animal advocates react to animal-based scientific experiments if we think the findings can be helpful? Should items like the research study mentioned above be included in HRC’s HumaneSpot.org database and/or utilized in any way by animal advocates? Please weigh in on the discussion using the comment form below (note: you must be logged in to make comments).


I just came across this

I just came across this "we'd like to hear your thoughts. Going back to our original question, how should animal advocates react to animal-based scientific experiments if we think the findings can be helpful?" It is a tough question, because to use the research you are fighting against can indicate that the research is useful. My opinion is that refraining from citing it is the better course, otherwise it helps validate their position in using animals in the first place. If you choose to use it the disclaimer is the best way to go, but maybe add that the ultimate goal is to find ways to end the need for animal based testing.

accepting animal research as the norm

Given the mission of HRC and your membership of advocates who seek a variety of research topics and methodologies, I think including the questionable research with the disclaimer is feasible. However, I am opposed to utilizing such research when writing for an audience of non-animal protectionists because it tends to give merit to animal research. Would we use similar research if it was conducted by the Nazis or by the U.S. government on POWs? If we incorporated such "research" into our writing without so much as a disclaimer most readers would be appalled, yet to include non-human subjects rarely raises an eyebrow. I recall reading a study on empathy displayed by fish published in a scientific journal and thinking how ironic that the researchers didn't test themselves for empathy...

animal based research

I also agree that the approach you have taken seems appropriate. Animal advocates should not hesitate to cite or otherwise rely on studies that involve harm to animals when such studies highlight the sentience of animals or the species-specific needs of animals. An important caveat would be that advocates should not cite, use, or rely on studies that attempt to extrapolate results from animals to humans even if the conclusion of the study seems helpful.

animal research and demonstrating animal sentience

I think that your approach is just right: rejecting animal experimentation explicitly and clearly, but posting research results that can aid people in helping animals--including working to end animal experimentation. Thanks for a thoughtful post.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.


PLEASE SUPPORT NONPROFIT RESEARCH FOR ANIMALS

Did you find this research helpful in your work for animals? If so, please consider a donation to the Humane Research Council to help us with the costs of maintaining, expanding, and improving HumaneSpot.org.