The Flaws and Human Harms of Animal Experimentation

The Flaws and Human Harms of Animal Experimentation

Nonhuman animal ("animal") experimentation is typically defended by arguments that it is reliable, that animals provide sufficiently good models of human biology and diseases to yield relevant information, and that, consequently, its use provides major human health benefits. I demonstrate that a growing body of scientific literature critically assessing the validity of animal experimentation ge...

Current sample size conventions: Flaws, harms, and alternatives

BACKGROUND The belief remains widespread that medical research studies must have statistical power of at least 80% in order to be scientifically sound, and peer reviewers often question whether power is high enough. DISCUSSION This requirement and the methods for meeting it have severe flaws. Notably, the true nature of how sample size influences a study's projected scientific or practical va...

The rights of man and animal experimentation.

Since emotions give contradictory signals about animal experimentation in medical science, man's relationship to animals must be based upon reason. Thomas Aquinas argues that man is essentially different from animals because man's intellectual processes show evidence of an abstract mechanism not possessed by animals. Man's rights arise in association with this essential difference. The conseque...

Preclinical animal anxiety research – flaws and prejudices

The current tests of anxiety in mice and rats used in preclinical research include the elevated plus-maze (EPM) or zero-maze (EZM), the light/dark box (LDB), and the open-field (OF). They are currently very popular, and despite their poor achievements, they continue to exert considerable constraints on the development of novel approaches. Hence, a novel anxiety test needs to be compared with th...

Animal experimentation and the First Amendment.