The Moral Standing of Non-human Primates: Why They Merit Special Consideration

Abstract

Scientific experiments with non-human primates are viewed very controversially. Those who use non-human primates for scientific purposes contend that the results will be of great benefit to humans. They say that the distress to the animals is minimal and that, therefore, their experiments are ethically acceptable. On the other hand, there are those who oppose non-human primate experiments altogether, due to the close relationship between these animals and humans. In a literature study on non-human primate experiments in fundamental brain research, the outcome of research projects performed over the period of a decade was evaluated retrospectively. Objective criteria were applied both for determining the cost (internationally published distress scores, taking into account distress due to procurement, transportation and housing) and the benefit (evaluating publications that arose from the experiments, citation scores and so forth). Taking the example of electrophysiological recordings in the brain of the awake macaque, this balancing ended up very different from that proposed by the scientists, and did not support the conclusion that the experiments had been ethically acceptable.

Ethical Review of Projects Involving Non-human Primates Funded under the European Union's 7th Research Framework Programme

“…Non-human primates (hereafter referred to as 'primates') are man's closest relatives in the animal kingdom, and this phylogenetic proximity has made them desirable research subjects for a broad variety of scientific purposes (1). However, their cognitive capacities and complex behaviour mean that there are serious animal welfare and ethical concerns about their use in procedures that would be unethical if performed in humans (2).…”

“…Therefore, the public have the right to be able to access information about the research their money supports, the benefits it delivers, and the costs it entails, especially with respect to the harms to the animals that people are clearly also concerned about. Openness on all of these issues is therefore essential, and there are Ethical Review of Projects Involving Non-human Primates Funded Under the European Union's 7th Research Framework Programme Ursula G. Sauer, 1 Barry Phillips, 2 Kirsty Reid, 3 Véronique Schmit 3 and Maggy Jennings 2 European Commission (hereafter referred to as 'Commission') initiatives on transparency of policy (9) that should be applied to primate use.…”

“…In the case of projects involving primates, Article 8 restricts the purposes of procedures for which primates may be used to translational or applied research "undertaken with a view to the avoidance, prevention, diagnosis or treatment of debilitating or potentially life-threatening clinical conditions in human beings", basic research, and research aimed at preservation of the species (although with a safeguard clause in Article 55 [1]). A 'debilitating clinical condition' is defined as "a reduction in a person's normal physical or psychological ability to function".…”

The Future of Non-human Primates as Laboratory Animals in Great Britain: Please Don't Build the Cambridge Laboratory!

“…A survey of the literature has shown that most of those who do this kind of work quote their own publications and those of scientists doing similar work, but have little wider impact, especially on clinical practice. 8 5. Similarly, there is little evidence that primates provide effective models for human disease, especially since insufficient is usually known either of the human disease, or of its purported relation in primates, for a rational judgement to be made about how useful the primate model is likely to be.…”

“…The use of such highly sentient creatures is morally indefensible -the main reason for the desire to use them, their similarity to ourselves, is also a most compelling reason for not doing so. 8 They share our capacity to suffer, which is much greater than that found in any other animals.…”