Full Title Name:  Animal Experimentation: Lessons from Human Experimentation

Share |
Arthur Birmingham LaFrance Place of Publication:  Lewis & Clark Law School Publish Year:  2007 Primary Citation:  14 Animal Law 29 (2007)

Conventional wisdom tells us that animal experimentation is a relevant precursor to human experimentation. The failings of human experimentation to protect human subjects, however, raise serious questions as to the safety and appropriateness of experimentation on animals. The federal government and medical community, since World War II, have used the Nuremberg Code and the federal “Common Rule” to determine how to conduct human experimentation ethically. Due to political or economic factors, government entities, hospitals, researchers, and pharmaceutical companies have continued to conduct human experimentation without the informed consent of their subjects. These human experiments have often achieved meaningless—or worse—devastating results. Because safeguards have failed with human experimentation, the federal and local governments, in conjunction with animal advocacy organizations, should take a series of concrete steps to eliminate an experimenter’s ability to cause pain, suffering, and unnecessary death to animals.

Documents:  lralvol14_1_29.pdf



Share |