Ethical Debates About Animal Suffering and the Use of Animals in Research

The ethical positions on which attacks on the use of animals in research are based have depended most commonly on treating the preferences of non-human animals as worthy of equal respect to those of humans. More radically, animals are believed to hold the same rights as humans. Such simplistic views are readily criticized and do not capture all the reasons why many people believe that animals, particularly complex ones, should be treated responsibly and with consideration. Moreover, strong moral arguments can also be mounted for using animals in order to understand the fundamental problems of biology and help to alleviate the suffering of humans and other animals. The tensions may be eased in practice by making every effort to minimize the suffering of those animals while ensuring that research is focused on important biological problems and, where possible, takes into account the likely benefits to health and well-being that may derive from the research. Assessments along these different dimensions of the moral dilemma are not trivial, but the assessment of welfare has, in particular, made significant advances in recent years. Behavioural biologists are well placed to advance discussion so that any one moral issue does not dominate the debate.