The topic of vivisection has caused a lot of controversy throughout the scientific world. The debate of if it was ethical to do such testing on another live being, or it was totally unethical to conduct such research, in a way that would cause a parasitic relationship, causing harm to one, and benefitting the other. But it wasn’t until 1908 when Erwin Popper and Karl Landsteiner conducted their experiment on monkeys, by injecting human spinal cord fluid into that of a monkey to discover the facts behind polio that the prosaic world started to get an interest for the debate.
The evolution of the scientific study and practice of vivisection, the action of cutting into or testing a product on a nonhuman, living, body in order to advance scientific knowledge, has provided many advancements in the scientific field as well as helped many humans. Vivisection has helped create things like vaccines, antibiotics, and has been used in the research for a cure to cancer. Also it was used to create techniques for operations like open heart surgery and organ transplants, as well as hormone replacement therapy. One of the most known vivisectors in the scientific community was Claude Bernard who once said “it’s entirely conclusive for the toxicology and the hygiene of man” in reference to his work, as a vivisector.
Though vivisection has helped create many advances in the scientific and medical realms there is still the entailment of the moral responsibility for harming, and some time killing, these animals. Many people and scientists on the con-vivisection side have fought vivisection with things like the animals right to its own life and how close the results of vivisection are to murder. Then there is the fact that the reactions of the other animals, whether it be monkeys or mice, the reaction to the surgery or external testing may vary substantially to the reaction it would have on an actual human. Because of this fact many scientist have tried to introduce ways...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document