Transcript Slides group 1

Seminar I: Ethical
analysis of a
study case
Research on animals
(Chapter 3)
Derar Al-smadi
Karthik Devaraj
Harri Geiger
Dorothee Vallot
Lisa Toller
First part
PRESENTATION OF THE
PROBLEM
Background on animal
experiments

Purpose




Paradox



Provides new knowledge
Benefits human being
For the sake of animals themselves
“We use (non human) animals in experiments, because they
are sufficiently like us (to achieve relevant results) – and since
they are sufficiently different from us (to allow us to motivate the
suffering we cause)”
Different values and norms for different times and cultures
How the responsability should be exercised?
Background on animal
experiments


Common perception that animal experiments are
needed for development and research
Ethics review



Harmonisation of EU research on animal welfare
Ethics comittees weight the expected importance of the
experiment against the expected suffering of the animal
Swedish legislation only applicable in Swedish territory...
Study case

We strongly suspect that an endangered
species have something that could
possibly cure a dangerous prominent
disease in humans. We are not allowed
to do experiments with these animals in
Sweden but we have collaborators from
another project in another country where
it could be allowed.
What to do?
Pitch the idea abroad but not taking part
in the research
 Collaborate and make the experiments
abroad
 Not share the idea with anyone
 Find an alternative to conduct this
research

Second part
ANALYSIS
Pitch the idea abroad but not
taking part in the research

Ethical problems or conflicts?



Potential harm on ecosystem and animals but not by us
Research led by another group with less ethical restrictions
Who is affected and how?



Ecosystem and animals- by extinction of animal.
No research output for us and our institution
Potential benefits for human beings
 Optimisation? Adaptation? Success?


Success for another group / our collaborators
Altruism
Collaborate and make the
experiments abroad

Ethical problems or conflicts?





Who is affected and how?




Experiments not allowed in Sweden but abroad (Moral problem but follows the
law)
People suffering from the disease
Endangered species harvesting (ecosystem problems)
Animal suffering
Beneficial for humans
Suffering of endangered species and risk of extinction
Own reputation amoung other researchers
Optimisation? Adaptation? Success?



Make empirical research on non-animal models to collect data before applying
the research on animals
Minimize the number of animals used
Make sure the group abroad respects certain ethical rules
Not share the idea with
anyone

Ethical problems or conflicts?



There will be no help to those suffering from the disease
No harm on animal neither ecosystem
Research potentially led by another group
 worse animal suffering (if they have “worse” ideas on what is okay to do in
the name of science)?
 Credits to another group

Who is affected and how?




People suffering from the disease (no cure)
Authorities (will not have to take stand in the matter)
No research output and credits for the group
Optimisation? Adaptation? Success?

Discussion with trusted co-workers/study of literature could give new
ideas on alternative research
Find an alternative to conduct
this research

Ethical problems or conflicts?



Wasting valuable time to find another way even though a solution
might be “around the corner”
There might not be another solution
Research potentially led by another group
 worse animal suffering (if they have “worse” ideas on what is okay to do in
the name of science)?
 Credits to another group in the short-term

Who is affected and how?



People suffering from the disease (no short-term cure)
Research group might not find a good path
Optimisation? Adaptation? Success?



Advertisement of ethically sound research based on animal research
Funding to encourage more ideas not to harm ecosystem no animals
Computer models to increase the success probability
Values involved and effects
on those?
Law and
regulation
Morally sound
Animal
suffering
Impact on
environment
/ ecosystem
Fighting
prominent
disease
Own reputation
Institution
benefits
Score
No
sharing
No
violation
Good for
environment /
ecosystem but not
for humanity
No (except if
someone
else has the
idea)
Endangered
species not
put at risk
No cure
No risk of bad
reputation but no
chance of fame
No
9
Collabor
ate and
make the
experime
nts
abroad
No
obvious
violation
Not good for
environment/ecosy
stem but for
humanity and
conflicts with
own/country values
Idirect
implication in
it
Endangered
species put at
risk
Potential
short-term
cure
risk of bad
reputation amoung
researchers but
not for the public
and chance of
fame
Chance of
more
funding +
collaboratio
n but share
of credits
7
Alternati
ve to
conduct
the
research
No
violation
Good for
environment /
ecosystem but no
short-term solution
for humanity
No (except if
someone
else takes
the idea)
Endangered
species not
put at risk
Maybe
long-term
cure
Very good
reputation amoung
researchers and
public but risk of
never finding
anything
Chance of
more
funding but
risk of
failure
11
Pitch the
idea
abroad
No
obvious
violation
Not good for
environment/ecosy
stem but for
humanity
Not under
our hands
but
implication in
it
Endangered
species put at
risk
Potential
short-term
cure
No risk of bad
reputation but no
chance of fame
No
6
Decision

We decide to find an alternative to the
study!