An animal protection group learns through information obtained under the Freedom of Information Act guidelines that the
Question:
An animal protection group learns through information obtained under the Freedom of Information Act guidelines that the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) has just funded a pharmacology project at the Cornell University Medical College to study drug addiction in cats. Protests are planned to publicize this waste of public money on obviously "barbaric" research. Some mental health professionals reviewed the literature and decided that there was no clinically useful information that has ever come from this lab, or labs doing similar work. The principal research investigator was invited to apply for this grant because she has done similar work in the past. She developed a study system where she surgically implants recording electrodes into cats' brains. When the cats awaken from anesthesia, they are wearing plastic bonnets glued to their skulls that allow the researchers to record the cats' brain waves. Cats are then addicted to various drugs, and their brain waves and behavior are studied when the drugs are discontinued. In the early days of this work, cats went through severe withdrawal reactions. When it was found that the earliest sign of withdrawal illness was a mildly disturbed brain wave pattern during sleep, the study protocol was modified so that it ended earlier. The current project to be funded proposes to examine a variety of "non-addicting" sedatives sold for human use, to investigate whether they are truly non-addicting. Cats that begin to show signs of withdrawal illness will be euthanized as soon as it is obvious that they are addicted (based on sleeping brain wave patterns). Government inspectors have never found violations upon inspecting her lab for proper experimental animal protocols. Because of the severe negative publicity, the researcher returned the grant, and will shift her work to rats. This will require repeating the early stages of describing the severe withdrawal reactions before she can define early, subtle patterns in the rats' brain waves that indicate addition. Some mental health experts bemoan the loss and delay of this valuable information.
Issues:
1) How do we decide if this project is a waste of cats' lives and taxpayers' dollars when the experts cannot agree?
2) Can animal models of complex human problems such as drug addiction ever be of use?
3) Is painful or distressing research more acceptable if we switch from cats to rats? Or frogs? Or invertebrates?
4) Do you trust government inspections of government-funded projects to be objective and reliable?
5) If a project is painful or causes distress to animals, does euthanasia during the early stages of pain make things any better, i.e. is killing animals better or worse than hurting them?
Business Law and the Legal Environment
ISBN: 978-1337736954
8th edition
Authors: Jeffrey F. Beatty, Susan S. Samuelson, Patricia Sanchez Abril