Rattus norvegicus, or the brown rat, is an animal that is unsurpassable in experimentation and research. This animal has proven to be an accurate model for human diseases, and has been successful in helping humans discover characteristics regarding illnesses such as heart disease and cancer that plague a significant portion of our population. Understanding the diseases that harm humans is extremely important for the future of science and medicine. However, genetics is not the only thing that rats share with humans. They also share intelligence, emotions and sociability, yet the Animal Welfare Act does not consider them to be animals under their federal law due to a change in 2002 (Farm 491). While plenty of laboratories take satisfactory care
…show more content…
Many of their claims are emotionally-driven, however rational and factual-based points have been made that are significant to take note of. Scientific community members such as Marc Bekoff, a professor of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology and an author, continuously show their disdain to the Animal Welfare Act as well as animal experimentation. “92% of drugs” that pass preclinical and animal testing “fail to proceed to the market” (Akhtar 410). The disparaging percentage of drugs that does pass causes one to wonder if testing on lab rats was worth it. Not to mention that drugs that seem perfectly fine for animals can sometimes make a patient sick due to misleading and skewed tests and data (Akhtar 414). Science is not all black and white. Countless wrongs have happened to be able to make a right. However, if nobody wants to take the time to make sure these animals are living comfortably before suffering a death that may or may not be worth it, another answer must exist. In recent years, 3d printed skin grafts and organs have been created for testing. Many other bio-engineered options exist or are being created. A step in the right direction is to invest in non-animal ways of testing to “improve our fundamental understanding of human biology” and create drugs that are increasingly accurate. If the government and laboratories want to save money by not …show more content…
It is known that rats must undergo certain distressful situations such as injections, genetic abnormalities, and various ailments such as paralysis. However, reporting these tests and the quality of life of the rats is not necessary to the law. All that the Animal Welfare Act needs to know is the number of rats being used (USDA). This makes it complicated to understand exactly what is going on undercover with these rats. It is possible to observe cases that violate the AWA that are on record to understand what AWA-protected animals are going through, which is an extremely minuscule percentage of lab animals. The Humane Society of the United States investigated a primate research facility and found “338 violations” of the AWA (HSUS). Although this does not pertain to rats, it does show that the AWA is not always effective in even protecting their covered animals. With any laboratory, a veterinarian is available for consultation by the researchers. However, “many investigators [fail]” to do so with “staff veterinarian[s],” and their biggest reason is due to “the cost [being] charged to the grant” that the researchers receive (Hubrecht 45). In any animal that is seen as higher than a rat, this would clearly be seen as neglect to cater to the animal’s health. If an institution is given grant money for research, that grant money should
Many of their claims are emotionally-driven, however rational and factual-based points have been made that are significant to take note of. Scientific community members such as Marc Bekoff, a professor of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology and an author, continuously show their disdain to the Animal Welfare Act as well as animal experimentation. “92% of drugs” that pass preclinical and animal testing “fail to proceed to the market” (Akhtar 410). The disparaging percentage of drugs that does pass causes one to wonder if testing on lab rats was worth it. Not to mention that drugs that seem perfectly fine for animals can sometimes make a patient sick due to misleading and skewed tests and data (Akhtar 414). Science is not all black and white. Countless wrongs have happened to be able to make a right. However, if nobody wants to take the time to make sure these animals are living comfortably before suffering a death that may or may not be worth it, another answer must exist. In recent years, 3d printed skin grafts and organs have been created for testing. Many other bio-engineered options exist or are being created. A step in the right direction is to invest in non-animal ways of testing to “improve our fundamental understanding of human biology” and create drugs that are increasingly accurate. If the government and laboratories want to save money by not …show more content…
It is known that rats must undergo certain distressful situations such as injections, genetic abnormalities, and various ailments such as paralysis. However, reporting these tests and the quality of life of the rats is not necessary to the law. All that the Animal Welfare Act needs to know is the number of rats being used (USDA). This makes it complicated to understand exactly what is going on undercover with these rats. It is possible to observe cases that violate the AWA that are on record to understand what AWA-protected animals are going through, which is an extremely minuscule percentage of lab animals. The Humane Society of the United States investigated a primate research facility and found “338 violations” of the AWA (HSUS). Although this does not pertain to rats, it does show that the AWA is not always effective in even protecting their covered animals. With any laboratory, a veterinarian is available for consultation by the researchers. However, “many investigators [fail]” to do so with “staff veterinarian[s],” and their biggest reason is due to “the cost [being] charged to the grant” that the researchers receive (Hubrecht 45). In any animal that is seen as higher than a rat, this would clearly be seen as neglect to cater to the animal’s health. If an institution is given grant money for research, that grant money should