A flimsy case for the use of non-human primates in research: a reply to Arnason

The Weatherall Report claims that research on non-human primates (NHPs) is permitted and morally required. The argument rests on the following thought experiment: The hospital fire: A hospital is on fire. Some of the residents are humans and others are non-human animals. You can only save one group....

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Faria, Catia (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: BMJ Publ. 2018
In: Journal of medical ethics
Year: 2018, Volume: 44, Issue: 5, Pages: 332-333
Online Access: Volltext (JSTOR)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)

MARC

LEADER 00000caa a22000002 4500
001 1816157805
003 DE-627
005 20230428063457.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 220908s2018 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1136/medethics-2017-104444  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1816157805 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1816157805 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Faria, Catia  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 2 |a A flimsy case for the use of non-human primates in research: a reply to Arnason 
264 1 |c 2018 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a The Weatherall Report claims that research on non-human primates (NHPs) is permitted and morally required. The argument rests on the following thought experiment: The hospital fire: A hospital is on fire. Some of the residents are humans and others are non-human animals. You can only save one group. What do you do?Some people have the intuition that we should rescue the humans. According to the report, if we accept that human lives have priority over non-human lives in this case, consistency requires us to support the use of non-human animals in research. This is because both cases are about saving human lives at the expense of the lives of non-human animals.Two critical replies appeared in the literature, by E J Moore1 and Muireann Quigley.2 In a recent paper3 Gardar Arnason claims that such objections fail. I will argue, however, that his assessment is unconvincing.The first objection pressed by Moore is that there are fundamental disanalogies between The hospital fire and biomedical research. In that scenario we face a life-or-death emergency situation whereas in biomedical research we do not. In such situations it may be justified to prioritise those closest to us (eg, species … 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Journal of medical ethics  |d London : BMJ Publ., 1975  |g 44(2018), 5, Seite 332-333  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)323607802  |w (DE-600)2026397-1  |w (DE-576)260773972  |x 1473-4257  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:44  |g year:2018  |g number:5  |g pages:332-333 
856 |3 Volltext  |u http://www.jstor.org/stable/26879732  |x JSTOR 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2017-104444  |x Resolving-System  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
856 4 0 |u http://jme.bmj.com/content/44/5/332.abstract  |x Verlag  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mteo 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4185611749 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1816157805 
LOK |0 005 20220908053721 
LOK |0 008 220908||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2022-08-03#6C7034672F0FAFEC25D172ACBAEB3D13CDA4BE6D 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 866   |x JSTOR#http://www.jstor.org/stable/26879732 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixrk  |a zota 
OAS |a 1  |b inherited from superior work 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw