While at first the use of animals was justified by saying that because they are animals they do not feel pain or share similarities with humans, recent studies have shown the contrary. In the article “Ethical and Scientific Considerations Regarding Animal Testing and Research” by Ferdowsian et al, 2011, the author talks about the scientific and ethics opportunities and challenges to implementing alternatives to animal research, he does this throughout the analysis of the two days multi-disciplinary, an international conference in Washington, DC, directed by members of several universities from the department of ethics, Alternatives to Animal testing and Vitro science.

First, the author talks about the lack of ethics and morals in the use of animals as subjects of experimentation and how they suffer more than scientists say. For example, the use of the 3 Rs in animal testing, these are principles for more ethical use of animals in testing:

1.  Replacement: methods which avoid or replace the use of animals in research

2.  Reduction: As many trials as required, as few as possible.

3.  Refinement: Minimize the stress of study animals.

Even if the use of the 3Rs reduces the level of animal testing cruelty, it does not make the pain these animals feel justified and “…do not adequately reflect the harms inherent in animal research; and the changing cultural perspectives about the place of animals in society.” This is because, although human research protections emphasize specific principles aimed at protecting the interests of individuals and populations over finding the answer of the scientific question, in animal research guidelines, on the other hand,  the importance of the scientific question being researched commonly takes precedence over the interests of individual animals. This shows that animals are not treated in the same way as humans do, however, they share similarities with humans in genetic, developmental, and environmental risk factors for psychopathology. For example, “…fear operates in a less organized subcortical neural circuit than pain. Animals present more complex markers of psychological distress. As well as varying forms of depression and Anxiety disorders, such as post-traumatic stress disorder and the capacity to experience physical and psychological pain or distress, animals also display many language-like abilities, complex problem-solving skills, tool-related cognition, and pleasure-seeking, with empathy and self-awareness also suggested by some research.” This shows the cruelty of scientists that practice animal testing because even when they know that animals feel pain and like humans do, they may experience psychological impairment, they do not protect the interest –the welfare– of the subject as a priority as they do with humans.

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?type=printable&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0024059 by Ferdowsian et al, 2011.