No Pain, No Gain? In Defence of Genetically Disenhancing (Most) Research Animals
Open Access
Abstract
Every year, around 12 million animals are used for the purpose of scientific research in the European Union alone. The procedures performed on them often cause significant pain and suffering. Despite regulations aimed at reducing this suffering, we can expect millions of research animals to continue to suffer in the near to mid-term future. Given this reality, we propose the use of gene editing to create research animals with a reduced capacity for suffering, in particular, from pain. We argue that our proposal would be in line with moral principles embedded in European regulations regarding animal research, and that it would facilitate compliance with these regulations. We also respond to the strongest argument against our proposal—the ‘no pain no gain’ argument.Keywords
Funding Information
- Messerli-Stiftung (NA)
- Wellcome Trust (Wellcome Trust, grant nr. 208189/Z/17/Z.)
This publication has 30 references indexed in Scilit:
- Animal Disenhancement for Animal Welfare: The Apparent Philosophical Conundrums and the Real Exploitation of Animals. A Response to Thompson and PalmerNanoEthics, 2012
- Confining ‘Disenhanced’ AnimalsNanoEthics, 2012
- The Disenhancement Problem in Agriculture: A Reply to ThompsonNanoEthics, 2012
- Pain in Laboratory Animals: The Ethical and Regulatory ImperativesPLOS ONE, 2011
- Intrinsic Value and the Genetic Engineering of AnimalsEnvironmental Values, 2008
- Neuroethics and the Problem of Other Minds: Implications of Neuroscience for the Moral Status of Brain-Damaged Patients and Nonhuman AnimalsNeuroethics, 2008
- Minding Mammals∗Philosophical Psychology, 2006
- The Neurobehavioral Nature of Fishes and the Question of Awareness and PainReviews in Fisheries Science, 2002
- Psychological and Neural Mechanisms of the Affective Dimension of PainScience, 2000
- Ethical scores for animal experimentsNature, 1992