The use of animals has become a protracted controversy in laboratory research. Partisans had convincing arguments for their positions on both sides of the conflict. The debate is unlikely to conclude anytime soon, evidently. It keeps intensifying with time, in reality. Nevertheless, regardless of the controversies, I agree that animals are a necessity in biopsychological, medical, or behavioral science and, as such, as seen in the following statement, their use in laboratories is inevitable. The American Psychological Association (n.d.), holds that the use of animals in psychological research has yielded tremendous benefits for both humans and animals over the years. These benefits range from understanding learning patterns, adaptation to change, and behavioral patterns, to understanding the central nervous system. Succinctly, a huge portion of current medical knowledge precipitated from animals in laboratories. Franco and Olsson (2016), in their contribution this debate, pose a critical question by asking if there is an alternative to the use of animals in laboratories. Their final position is that in cases where animals are the only option, and the need to experiment is necessary, it is permissible to use the animals, albeit with humane treatment. This argument is consistent with the APA guide on the use of animals in research. The two resources make a potent point on this subject. Anyone who opposes the use of animals in laboratories needs to answer this question; what is the alternative? Research is inevitable, and since some experiments are too delicate to involve humans, animals are the best alternative. Thus, their use in biopsychological research is justified.
Conclusively, it is apparent that the use of animals in laboratories is inevitable. Some experiments are both necessary and dangerous. Under such circumstances, animals must be used because they bear the closest resemblance to humans regarding how their bodies function. Thus, although evil as it may seem at times, the use of animals in laboratory research is fully justified, provided the researchers use them objectively.
American Psychological Association. (n.d.). Research with animals in psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Franco, N. H., & Olsson, I. A. S. (2016). Killing animals as a necessary evil? The case of animal research. In The end of animal life: a start for ethical debate: Ethical and societal considerations on killing animals (pp. 219-226). Wageningen Academic Publishers.