Some scientific studies suggest that humans and chimps share as much as 98.7% of their DNA. Scientists have determined that humans and chimps are more similar to each other genetically than organisms in the same species. Since they are so similar, do you think it would be useful to use chimps as stand-ins for humans during scientific research? Or, since they are so similar, do we have a moral obligation not to use them in research? Make sure you explain your answer, and make sure you support your thoughts and opinions with references and citations.
In my opinion I feel that even those humans and chimps are 98.7% similar there is still a 1.3 percentage difference between us and chimps. Because of that 1.3% difference between us, their bodies may response differently to diseases as well as treatment than ours. In the mid-80's,there was a major breeding effort in order to create chimpanzees for use in HIV research—but this model largely failed when it was found that chimpanzees exposed to HIV do not progress to AIDS (Balls 1995,Nath, Schumann, and Boyer 2000). As a result of this failure, we started to see a decline in chimpanzee research in the 1990's as some laboratories began to shut down. Despite their similarity to humans, chimps don't react to infection the same way. In HIV research, for example, a possible vaccine protected the chimps but not people, NIH scientists wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2007. Also in 2007, an article in the British Medical Journal concluded: "When it comes to testing HIV vaccines, only humans will do." Jarrod Bailey, the science director for the chimp-release campaign of the anti-animal testing New England Anti-Vivisection Society, pointed to one key difference: HIV infection doesn't generally result in a significant decline in T-cells — a type of disease-fighting white blood cell — in chimps; in humans, it does. Bailey said that about 100 vaccines had been tested in nonhuman primates, including chimpanzees, and...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document