The thought of using animals in research usually makes me sick. When I hear about using animals in research, my mind immediately goes to the use of animals in cosmetic research. I start to picture poor little bunny rabbits missing hair and having swollen faces with red eyes. I know that cosmetic research is not the only research using live animals. Now that I have learned more about using rats in scientific research, I have mixed feelings about it. Something inside of me tells me that using electrical shocks to coerce animals into learning a desired trait is wrong. If humans would not voluntarily sign up to do these things, then why are we forcing animals (who have no say in the matter) to do them?
At the same time, I can understand why we …show more content…
After reading the second article, I feel much better about the use of animals in research. I am glad that before an experiment can be done, psychologists must first consider if nonhuman animals can be used and if not, they must minimize the number of nonhuman animals used. This article also made me realize how prepared the experimenters must be and how thought out their experiments must be. The third article made me realize that the psychologist leading the experiment is also responsible for making sure everyone else in their laboratory is up to date with the very specific code of ethics. It makes me feel better that there are strict requirements in the housing of animals for experimental purposes. Psychologists also have to make sure that when an animal's life is terminated, it is done so in a rapid manner with minimal pain involved in accordance with the accepted procedures already set in …show more content…
I do not think that animals should be used to study such intense drug addictions, but protesters should not violate other people’s privacy and post their personal information for everyone to see. I understand that people have the right to their own opinions, but the researcher’s should not be fearing for their lives. I am curious as to why UCLA refused to let the people covering this story film their laboratory. Are the things going on there really as bad as the protesters are making it out to be? I agree with the doctor who said that removing animals from experimentation would be wrong and that if we did, we would be going back in our scientific
At the same time, I can understand why we …show more content…
After reading the second article, I feel much better about the use of animals in research. I am glad that before an experiment can be done, psychologists must first consider if nonhuman animals can be used and if not, they must minimize the number of nonhuman animals used. This article also made me realize how prepared the experimenters must be and how thought out their experiments must be. The third article made me realize that the psychologist leading the experiment is also responsible for making sure everyone else in their laboratory is up to date with the very specific code of ethics. It makes me feel better that there are strict requirements in the housing of animals for experimental purposes. Psychologists also have to make sure that when an animal's life is terminated, it is done so in a rapid manner with minimal pain involved in accordance with the accepted procedures already set in …show more content…
I do not think that animals should be used to study such intense drug addictions, but protesters should not violate other people’s privacy and post their personal information for everyone to see. I understand that people have the right to their own opinions, but the researcher’s should not be fearing for their lives. I am curious as to why UCLA refused to let the people covering this story film their laboratory. Are the things going on there really as bad as the protesters are making it out to be? I agree with the doctor who said that removing animals from experimentation would be wrong and that if we did, we would be going back in our scientific