Table 3. Ideas and Arguments both for and against Animal Experimentation

Category

Number of animal researchers reporting each idea

Number of animal rights campaigners reporting each idea

Level of significant differences between groups(Chi-square test)

In support of animal experimentation:

Medical and therapeutic advances result

20

16

n.s.

Humans are more important than animals

1

17

p<.001

Animal experiments are necessary for progress

6

5

n.s.

Toxicity testing of drugs, etc. is essential for safety

4

5

n.s.

The animals don't really suffer/don't suffer much

1

7

p<.05

Animal experiments are no morally worse than meat production

6

1

p<.05

Using animals is part of natural life (e.g., predators in wild)

3

2

n.s.

Humans and animals are similar, so experiments are reliable

2

2

n.s.

People have no right to dictate their morals to others

3

0

n.s.

Animal experiments are cost effective/financially rewarding

0

2

n.s.

The law allows it

1

1

n.s.

Opposing animal experimentation:

Appeals to equality, justice, animal rights

15

15

n.s.

Results are not reliable nor applicable to humans

12

13

n.s.

Experiments are cruel, causing pain and suffering

10

11

n.s.

Alternative techniques, not using animals, are available

5

10

n.s.

Many experiments are useless, unnecessary (e.g., cosmetics)

1

6

p<.05

Enough is known, we don't need any more experiments

3

3

n.s.

Dubious motives for animal research (e.g., money, career, sadism)

2

4

n.s.

Researchers/mankind are corrupted by animal experiments

2

3

n.s.

Highlight particular disasters (e.g., Thalidomide)

1

3

n.s.

Animals can't talk, so people have to speak out for them

2

0

n.s.