Ron Crum rated it it was amazing Mar 26, Wesley Yaryan rated it it was amazing Jan 10, Jennifer Harley lucas marked it as to-read May 01, Curnelle marked it as to-read Mar 13, Radwa Salem marked it as to-read Jul 11, Beatrice marked it as to-read Jan 16, Nisrine marked it as to-read Feb 22, Renae Johnson marked it as to-read May 15, Andrew added it Sep 05, Bella marked it as to-read Jan 29, Crystal marked it as to-read Oct 26, There are no discussion topics on this book yet.
About Daniel Steele. Daniel Steele. Books by Daniel Steele. Trivia About Mile-Stone Papers No trivia or quizzes yet. Welcome back. The Church, the Kingdom of God and the renewal of social relations c. New heavens and a new earth d. The Church, God's dwelling place with men and women b. Enriching and permeating society with the Gospel c. Social doctrine, evangelization and human promotion d. The rights and duties of the Church. Knowledge illuminated by faith b.
In friendly dialogue with all branches of knowledge c. An expression of the Church's ministry of teaching d. For a society reconciled in justice and love e. A message for the sons and daughters of the Church and for humanity f. Under the sign of continuity and renewal. The beginning of a new path b. From Rerum Novarum to our own day c.
In the light and under the impulse of the Gospel. Creatures in the image of God b. The tragedy of sin c. The universality of sin and the universality of salvation. The unity of the person B. Openness to transcendence and uniqueness of the person. Open to transcendence b. Unique and unrepeatable c. Respect for human dignity. The value and limits of freedom b. The bond uniting freedom with truth and the natural law.
The equal dignity of all people E. The social nature of human beings. The value of human rights b. The specification of rights c. Rights and duties d. Rights of peoples and nations e. Filling in the gap between the letter and the spirit. Meaning and primary implications b. Responsibility of everyone for the common good c. Tasks of the political community. Origin and meaning b. The universal destination of goods and private property c. The universal destination of goods and the preferential option for the poor. Concrete indications. Meaning and value b. Participation and democracy.
Solidarity as a social principle and a moral virtue c. Solidarity and the common growth of mankind d. Solidarity in the life and message of Jesus Christ. The relationship between principles and values b. Truth c. Freedom d. Importance of the family for the person b. Importance of the family for society. The value of marriage b. The sacrament of marriage. Love and the formation of a community of persons b.
The family is the sanctuary of life c. The task of educating d. The dignity and rights of children. Solidarity in the family b. The family, economic life and work. The duty to cultivate and care for the earth b. Jesus, a man of work c. The duty to work. The subjective and objective dimensions of work b. The relationship between labour and capital c. Work, the right to participate d. The relationship between labour and private property e. Rest from work. Work is necessary b. The role of the State and civil society in promoting the right to work c. The family and the right to work d.
Women and the right to work e. Child labour f. Immigration and work g. The world of agriculture and the right to work. The dignity of workers and the respect for their rights b. The right to fair remuneration and income distribution c. The right to strike. The importance of unions b. New forms of solidarity. An epoch-making phase of transition b. Man, poverty and riches b.
Wealth exists to be shared. Business and its goals b. Role of business owners and management. Role of the free market b. Action of the State c. Role of intermediate bodies d. Savings and consumer goods. Globalization: opportunities and risks b. The international financial system c. Role of the international community in an era of a global economy d. An integral development in solidarity e. Need for more educational and cultural formation. God's dominion b. Jesus and political authority c. The early Christian communities.
Political community, the human person and a people b. Defending and promoting human rights c. Social life based on civil friendship. The foundation of political authority b. Authority as moral force c. The right to conscientious objection d. The right to resist e.
Free Thought Lives
Inflicting punishment. Values and democracy b. Institutions and democracy c. Moral components of political representation d. Instruments for political participation e. Information and democracy. Value of civil society b. Priority of civil society c. Application of the principle of subsidiarity.
Religious freedom, a fundamental human right B. The Catholic Church and the political community. Autonomy and independence b. Unity of the human family b. Jesus Christ, prototype and foundation of the new humanity c. The universal vocation of Christianity. The international community and values b.
Relations based on harmony between the juridical and moral orders. The value of international organizations b. The juridical personality of the Holy See. Cooperation to guarantee the right to development b. The fight against poverty c. Foreign debt. The environment, a collective good b. The use of biotechnology c. The environment and the sharing of goods d. New lifestyles. Legitimate defence b. Defending peace c. The duty to protect the innocent d.
Measures against those who threaten peace e. Disarmament f. The condemnation of terrorism. Social doctrine and the inculturation of faith b. Social doctrine and social pastoral activity c. Social doctrine and formation d. Promoting dialogue e. The subjects of social pastoral activity. The lay faithful b. Spirituality of the lay faithful c. Acting with prudence d. Social doctrine and lay associations e. Service in the various sectors of social life. Service to the human person 2.
Service in culture 3. Service in the economy 4. Service in politics. The help that the Church offers to modern man b. Starting afresh from faith in Christ c. A solid hope d. Index of references Analytical index. Apostolic Exhortation Ap. Letter Apostolic Letter c. Denzinger - A.
Letter Encyclical Letter ibid. Migne q. Continuing to expound and update the rich patrimony of Catholic social doctrine, Pope John Paul II has for his part published three great Encyclicals — Laborem Exercens , Sollicitudo Rei Socialis and Centesimus Annus — that represent fundamental stages of Catholic thought in this area. For their part, numerous Bishops in every part of the world have contributed in recent times to a deeper understanding of the Church's social doctrine. Numerous scholars on every continent have done the same. It was therefore hoped that a compendium of all this material should be compiled, systematically presenting the foundations of Catholic social doctrine.
It is commendable that the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace has taken up this task, devoting intense efforts to this initiative in recent years. This work also shows the value of Catholic social doctrine as an instrument of evangelization cf. Centesimus Annus , 54 , because it places the human person and society in relationship with the light of the Gospel.
The principles of the Church's social doctrine, which are based on the natural law, are then seen to be confirmed and strengthened, in the faith of the Church, by the Gospel of Christ. In this light, men and women are invited above all to discover themselves as transcendent beings, in every dimension of their lives, including those related to social, economic and political contexts. Faith brings to fullness the meaning of the family, which, founded on marriage between one man and one woman, constitutes the first and vital cell of society.
It moreover sheds light on the dignity of work, which, as human activity destined to bring human beings to fulfilment, has priority over capital and confirms their rightful claim to share in the fruits that result from work. In the present text we can see the importance of moral values, founded on the natural law written on every human conscience; every human conscience is hence obliged to recognize and respect this law.
Humanity today seeks greater justice in dealing with the vast phenomenon of globalization; it has a keen concern for ecology and a correct management of public affairs; it senses the need to safeguard national consciences, without losing sight however of the path of law and the awareness of the unity of the human family.
The world of work, profoundly changed by the advances of modern technology, reveals extraordinary levels of quality, but unfortunately it must also acknowledge new forms of instability, exploitation and even slavery within the very societies that are considered affluent. In different areas of the planet the level of well-being continues to grow, but there is also a dangerous increase in the numbers of those who are becoming poor, and, for various reasons, the gap between less developed and rich countries is widening.
The free market, an economic process with positive aspects, is nonetheless showing its limitations. On the other hand, the preferential love for the poor represents a fundamental choice for the Church, and she proposes it to all people of good will. Contemporary cultural and social issues involve above all the lay faithful, who are called, as the Second Vatican Council reminds us, to deal with temporal affairs and order them according to God's will cf.
Lumen Gentium , We can therefore easily understand the fundamental importance of the formation of the laity, so that the holiness of their lives and the strength of their witness will contribute to human progress. This document intends to help them in this daily mission. Moreover, it is interesting to note how the many elements brought together here are shared by other Churches and Ecclesial Communities, as well as by other Religions.
The text has been presented in such a way as to be useful not only from within ab intra , that is among Catholics, but also from outside ab extra. In fact, those who share the same Baptism with us, as well as the followers of other Religions and all people of good will, can find herein fruitful occasions for reflection and a common motivation for the integral development of every person and the whole person.
The Holy Father, while hoping that the present document will help humanity in its active quest for the common good, invokes God's blessings on those who will take the time to reflect on the teachings of this publication. In expressing my own personal good wishes for the success of this endeavour, I congratulate Your Eminence and your collaborators at the Pontifical Council of Justice and Peace for the important work carried out, and with sentiments of respect I remain.
I am pleased to present the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church , which, according to the request received from the Holy Father, has been drawn up in order to give a concise but complete overview of the Church's social teaching. Transforming social realities with the power of the Gospel, to which witness is borne by women and men faithful to Jesus Christ, has always been a challenge and it remains so today at the beginning of the third millennium of the Christian era.
For this very reason the men and women of our day have greater need than ever of the Gospel: of the faith that saves, of the hope that enlightens, of the charity that loves. The reading of these pages is suggested above all in order to sustain and foster the activity of Christians in the social sector, especially the activity of the lay faithful to whom this area belongs in a particular way; the whole of their lives must be seen as a work of evangelization that produces fruit. This work, entrusted to me and now offered to those who will read it, carries therefore the seal of a great witness to the Cross who remained strong in faith in the dark and terrible years of Vietnam.
This witness will know of our gratitude for all his precious labour, undertaken with love and dedication, and he will bless those who stop to reflect on these pages. I invoke the intercession of Saint Joseph, Guardian of the Redeemer and Husband of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Patron of the Universal Church and of Work, so that this text will bear abundant fruit in the life of society as an instrument for the proclamation of the Gospel, for justice and for peace. At the dawn of the Third Millennium.
Jn through which we passed during the Great Jubilee of the year . Jesus Christ is the Way, the Truth and the Life cf. Jn : contemplating the Lord's face, we confirm our faith and our hope in him, the one Saviour and goal of history. The Church continues to speak to all people and all nations, for it is only in the name of Christ that salvation is given to men and women. At the dawn of this Third Millennium, the Church does not tire of proclaiming the Gospel that brings salvation and genuine freedom also to temporal realities.
For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own likings, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander into myths. To the people of our time, her travelling companions, the Church also offers her social doctrine. Discovering that they are loved by God, people come to understand their own transcendent dignity, they learn not to be satisfied with only themselves but to encounter their neighbour in a network of relationships that are ever more authentically human.
They are people capable of bringing peace where there is conflict, of building and nurturing fraternal relationships where there is hatred, of seeking justice where there prevails the exploitation of man by man. Only love is capable of radically transforming the relationships that men maintain among themselves. This is the perspective that allows every person of good will to perceive the broad horizons of justice and human development in truth and goodness.
Love faces a vast field of work and the Church is eager to make her contribution with her social doctrine, which concerns the whole person and is addressed to all people. So many needy brothers and sisters are waiting for help, so many who are oppressed are waiting for justice, so many who are unemployed are waiting for a job, so many peoples are waiting for respect. Condemned to illiteracy? Lacking the most basic medical care? Without a roof over their head? The scenario of poverty can extend indefinitely, if in addition to its traditional forms we think of its newer patterns.
These latter often affect financially affluent sectors and groups which are nevertheless threatened by despair at the lack of meaning in their lives, by drug addiction, by fear of abandonment in old age or sickness, by marginalization or social discrimination And how can we remain indifferent to the prospect of an ecological crisis which is making vast areas of our planet uninhabitable and hostile to humanity?
Or by the problems of peace, so often threatened by the spectre of catastrophic wars?
Or by contempt for the fundamental human rights of so many people, especially children? Christian love leads to denunciation, proposals and a commitment to cultural and social projects; it prompts positive activity that inspires all who sincerely have the good of man at heart to make their contribution. Humanity is coming to understand ever more clearly that it is linked by one sole destiny that requires joint acceptance of responsibility, a responsibility inspired by an integral and shared humanism.
It sees that this mutual destiny is often conditioned and even imposed by technological and economic factors, and it senses the need for a greater moral awareness that will guide its common journey. Marvelling at the many innovations of technology, the men and women of our day strongly desire that progress be directed towards the true good of the humanity, both of today and tomorrow. The significance of this document. The Christian knows that in the social doctrine of the Church can be found the principles for reflection, the criteria for judgment and the directives for action which are the starting point for the promotion of an integral and solidary humanism.
It is in this light that the publication of a document providing the fundamental elements of the social doctrine of the Church, showing the relationship between this doctrine and the new evangelization , appeared to be so useful. The Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, which has drawn up the present document and is fully responsible for its content, prepared the text in a broad-based consultation with its own Members and Consulters, with different Dicasteries of the Roman Curia, with the Bishops' Conferences of various countries, with individual Bishops and with experts on the issues addressed.
This document intends to present in a complete and systematic manner, even if by means of an overview, the Church's social teaching, which is the fruit of careful Magisterial reflection and an expression of the Church's constant commitment in fidelity to the grace of salvation wrought in Christ and in loving concern for humanity's destiny. Herein the most relevant theological, philosophical, moral, cultural and pastoral considerations of this teaching are systematically presented as they relate to social questions. In this way, witness is borne to the fruitfulness of the encounter between the Gospel and the problems that mankind encounters on its journey through history.
In studying this Compendium, it is good to keep in mind that the citations of Magisterial texts are taken from documents of differing authority. Alongside council documents and encyclicals there are also papal addresses and documents drafted by offices of the Holy See. As one knows, but it seems to bear repeating, the reader should be aware that different levels of teaching authority are involved. The document limits itself to putting forth the fundamental elements of the Church's social doctrine, leaving to Episcopal Conferences the task of making the appropriate applications as required by the different local situations.
This document offers a complete overview of the fundamental framework of the doctrinal corpus of Catholic social teaching. This overview allows us to address appropriately the social issues of our day, which must be considered as a whole, since they are characterized by an ever greater interconnectedness, influencing one another mutually and becoming increasingly a matter of concern for the entire human family. The exposition of the Church's social doctrine is meant to suggest a systematic approach for finding solutions to problems, so that discernment, judgment and decisions will correspond to reality, and so that solidarity and hope will have a greater impact on the complexities of current situations.
These principles, in fact, are interrelated and shed light on one another mutually, insofar as they are an expression of Christian anthropology, fruits of the revelation of God's love for the human person. However, it must not be forgotten that the passing of time and the changing of social circumstances will require a constant updating of the reflections on the various issues raised here, in order to interpret the new signs of the times. The document is presented as an instrument for the moral and pastoral discernment of the complex events that mark our time; as a guide to inspire, at the individual and collective levels, attitudes and choices that will permit all people to look to the future with greater trust and hope ; as an aid for the faithful concerning the Church's teaching in the area of social morality.
From this there can spring new strategies suited to the demands of our time and in keeping with human needs and resources. In short, the text is proposed as an incentive for dialogue with all who sincerely desire the good of mankind. This document is intended first of all for Bishops, who will determine the most suitable methods for making it known and for interpreting it correctly. Priests, men and women religious , and, in general, those responsible for formation will find herein a guide for their teaching and a tool for their pastoral service.
Christian communities will be able to look to this document for assistance in analyzing situations objectively, in clarifying them in the light of the unchanging words of the Gospel, in drawing principles for reflection, criteria for judgment and guidelines for action. This document is proposed also to the brethren of other Churches and Ecclesial Communities, to the followers of other religions, as well as to all people of good will who are committed to serving the common good : may they receive it as the fruit of a universal human experience marked by countless signs of the presence of God's Spirit.
It is a treasury of things old and new cf. It is a sign of hope in the fact that religions and cultures today show openness to dialogue and sense the urgent need to join forces in promoting justice, fraternity, peace and the growth of the human person. The Catholic Church joins her own commitment to that made in the social field by other Churches and Ecclesial Communities, whether at the level of doctrinal reflection or at the practical level.
Together with them, the Catholic Church is convinced that from the common heritage of social teachings preserved by the living tradition of the people of God there will come motivations and orientations for an ever closer cooperation in the promotion of justice and peace. At the service of the full truth about man. Ex ; Jn and moves among them cf. By means of the present document, the Church intends to offer a contribution of truth to the question of man's place in nature and in human society, a question faced by civilizations and cultures in which expressions of human wisdom are found.
Rooted in a past that is often thousands of years old and manifesting themselves in forms of religion, philosophy and poetic genius of every time and of every people, these civilizations and cultures offer their own interpretation of the universe and of human society, and seek an understanding of existence and of the mystery that surrounds it. Who am I? Why is there pain, evil, death, despite all the progress that has been made? He would, however, die a national hero, being given the first state funeral ever to be granted to a scientist in France.
In his later years, he would collect the highest academic and political honors, including a seat in the French senate [ 88 , , , ]. Despite their utter disregard for animal suffering, Magendie and Bernard did not see themselves as the immoral senseless villains portrayed by their detractors, but rather as humanists. Indeed, their view that animals did not deserve the same moral consideration as humans made them condemn experiments in humans without previous work on animals, the general principle on which the use of animal models in biomedical science is still grounded.
The amorality of human experiments prior to animal testing in animals was also an ethical argument raised in favor of vivisection by Bernard [ 89 ], who wrote:. No hesitation is possible, the science of life can be established only by experiment, and we can save living beings from death only by sacrificing others. Experiments must be made either on man or on animals.
Now I think physicians already make too many dangerous experiments on man, before carefully studying them on animals. I do not admit that it is moral to try more or less dangerous or active remedies on patients, without first experimenting with them on dogs; for I shall prove, further on, that results obtained on animals may all be conclusive for man when we know how to experiment properly.
If it is immoral, then, to make an experiment on man when it is dangerous to him, even though the result may be useful to others, it is essentially moral to do experiments on an animal, even though painful and dangerous to him, if they may be useful to man. In fact, even before the solidifying of the antivivisectionist struggle, British physiologists had set themselves guidelines for responsible research [ , ].
Nevertheless, many researchers still found the analgesic and anesthetic effect of these volatile agents to be a source of undesired variability, thus avoiding their use altogether [ 99 , ]. The upsurge of animal research in Britain was accompanied by an intensification of the antivivisectionist struggle. In , the first animal protection society with the specific aim of abolishing animal experiments was founded: the Victoria Street Society for the Protection of Animals Liable to Vivisection later known as the National Anti-Vivisection Society , led by Irish feminist, suffragist, and animal advocate Frances Power Cobbe — As the original argument of antivivisectionists that animal research was inacceptable because it did not provide useful medical knowledge began to lose strength however, it remained a recurrent accusation against animal research, see, for instance, [ ] , the discussion shifted towards preventing unnecessary harm, rather than questioning the scientific value of animal experiments [ 99 ].
On the other hand, the use of anesthetics now allowed British scientists to argue that most physiological experiments involved little, if any, pain [ , , ]. While this made some antivivisectionists ponder about their own standing on the use of animals in research—namely those who opposed vivisection on the grounds that the intense and prolonged suffering endured by animals on the physiologist table was intolerable—many others felt that the most relevant value at stake was the preservation of each animal life in itself, questioning if human benefit was sufficient reason for sacrificing animals [ 99 , ].
Moreover, the claim that animals were rendered senseless to pain gave carte blanche to many physiologists to use as many animals as they pleased for research, teaching, and demonstrations, despite anesthesia often being improperly administered, thus failing to prevent suffering for more than the brief initial moments. These views included outright abolitionism and, on the opposite pole, scientists demanding to be allowed to work without restrictions; non-scientists accusing researchers to be self-biased and unable to think ethically about their work and, on the other side of the barricade, researchers disdaining the authority of non-scientists to criticize their work; the benefit for humankind argument vs.
Just like today, there were also those who valued both animal protection and scientific progress and, recognizing that each side had both relevant and fallacious arguments, found themselves in the middle-ground, where they sought ways for compromise and progress. Amongst these, the most notable was Charles Darwin, known for his affection to animals and abhorrence for any kind of cruelty, but also for his commitment to scientific reasoning and progress [ , , ].
Additionally, Joseph Lister — , one of the most influential physicians of his time, would decline a request by Queen Victoria in for him to speak out against vivisection. Lister was one of the few British surgeons that carried out vivisection, albeit only occasionally, and was acquainted with some of the most eminent continental physiologists. In his response letter to the Queen, he pointed out the importance of animal experiments for the advancement of medical knowledge, stressed that anesthetics should be used at all times, and also denounced the ill treatment of animals in sports, cruel training methods, and artificial fattening of animals for human consumption as being more cruel than their use in research [ ].
Despite coming from opposite ends , both bills proposed reasonable regulation of animal experiments, rather than demanding severe restriction or granting scientists unlimited rights to use animals. The crucial difference was that the Henniker bill called for all researchers and all kinds of experiments to be properly licensed and supervised, as it is today in Great Britain, while the Playfair bill proposed that the law should only be applied to painful experiments. In the absence of parliamentary consensus for either one or the other bill, a Royal Commission—properly balanced to include members of the RSPCA and a few eminent scientists, including T.
Huxley—was appointed that same year to address this issue, which would result in the amendment of the Cruelty to Animals Act in order to regulate the use of animals for scientific purposes, being the first case of this kind of legislation in the world [ 99 , , , ]. This bill would endure for years, until the enactment of the Animals Scientific Procedures Act, and remain the only known legislation to regulate animal experiments for nearly 50 years, despite some attempts to pass similar bills in other Western countries, where antivivisectionism was growing, particularly in Germany, Switzerland, Sweden, and North America [ 14 , ].
The recrudescence and spread of antivivisection feelings in the late nineteenth century was coincidental with the long-awaited beginning of direct clinical and public health benefit from animal research. Before the end of the century, the germ theory of infectious diseases— i. This knowledge would have an immediate, profound, and enduring effect on public health, surgery and medicine.
Although it had been earlier proposed by Ignaz P. Until then, previous efforts to make hand-washing a standard procedure had been ridiculed by the medical class. Pasteur, a professor of chemistry with a doctoral thesis on crystallography, would turn his attention to biology in [ ]. Together with Claude Bernard, a close friend, he would later develop the process of pasteurization to destroy microorganisms in food.
Pasteur began hypothesizing that microbes could also be the causative agents of many diseases affecting humans and other animals. Pasteur would frequently receive hate letters and threats, mostly for his infection studies on dogs, although he also used chickens, rabbits, rodents, pigs, cows, sheep, and non-human primates Figure 4. Pasteur was, however, more sensitive to animal suffering than most of his French counterparts. Not only was he uneasy with the experiments conducted—although sure of their necessity—he would also always insist animals be anesthetized whenever possible to prevent unnecessary suffering.
Furthermore, he would become directly responsible for saving countless animals from the burden of disease and subsequent culling [ 5 , , , , ]. In the article, the reader is reassured that the use of dogs is both humane and justified in the interest of mankind. The use of other species, however, is barely mentioned [ 5 ]. Source: Images from the History of Medicine , U. National Library of Science.
The overlapping interest of Pasteur and Koch on anthrax would trigger a bitter rivalry between the two, fuelled by their different approaches to microbiology, as well as chauvinistic Germany—France rivalry [ , ]. This included Emil von Behring — and Paul Ehrlich — , both responsible for the first antitoxin for treatment of diphtheria—developed from horse serum—for which von Behring received the Nobel Prize in Von Behring would also develop an antitoxin for immunization against tetanus, along with Shibasaburo Kitasato — , who had also studied under Koch.
In , Ehrlich would also be awarded the Nobel Prize for contributions to immunology, and would yet again be nominated for his contributions to chemotherapy and the development of Salvasaran an effective treatment against syphilis , in particular [ , , , ]. The development and production of vaccines and antitoxins led to a dramatic increase in the number of animals used in research. The number of animals used by physiologists in the nineteenth century would be negligible in comparison with the several hundred used by Pasteur to develop, test, and produce vaccines, the thousands of mice used by Paul Ehrlich for the production of Salvasaran—his syphilis drug—and the millions of primates that would be used to produce Polio vaccines in the s [ 5 ].
By the end of the nineteenth and beginning of the twentieth century, the pharmacopeia had effective, scientifically tested drugs, a landmark that allowed for an increasing number of people to understand the importance and validity of scientifically sound medical knowledge and, with it, the relevance of animal-based research see [ , , , ].
One could still find as far as the end of the nineteenth century, however, physicians who disregarded the ideals of scientific medicine and vigorously stood by their traditional epistemological view of medicine and clinical practice, which they saw as more of a form of art than as a science. Many such physicians also opposed experiments on live animals and were members of antivivisection societies [ 77 , , , ].
Nonetheless, the medical profession, medicine itself, and human health had now been irreversibly changed by science, and would continue to be pushed forward throughout the twentieth century to now. The twentieth century would witness astonishing advances in medical knowledge and the treatment of disease. The advances of biomedical research to human health since the dawn of the past century are countless, with animal research playing a role in a number of important discoveries for an overview, see [ ].
Of the Nobel Prizes in physiology or medicine given since , on 83 occasions work conducted on vertebrate species other than human was awarded, while in another four instances, research relied heavily on results obtained from animal experiments in vertebrates conducted by other groups [ ]. Another indirect measure of the impact that biomedical progress had on the twentieth century was the increase in life expectancy, which in some developed countries doubled between and , and is still on the rise today [ , , ].
The argument that no medical progress could be obtained through animal research was becoming increasingly difficult to uphold and, as researchers pledged to avoid animal suffering whenever possible, criticism of animal experiments on the grounds of cruelty toned down.
Steele, Daniel 1824-1914
However, not all scientists had sufficient, if any, consideration for animal suffering, and research would continue to be unregulated in most countries. Nevertheless, the exaggerated claims, radical abolitionist views, and scientific denialism by more inflexible antivivisectionists would make them lose support from the general public and more moderate animal protection groups, leading to a decline—albeit not an end—to the antivivisection movement, until its resurgence in the s.
Confronted with a general lack of support, moreover in a period that would witness two great world wars and a serious economic recession—which would push the interests of animals further to the background—the line of action of antivivisectionists through most of the twentieth century focused on banning the use of dogs and other companion animals [ 5 , , , , ].
The toning down of the opposition to animal use in the life sciences had also something to do with the emergence of rodent species as a recurrent animal model in research. Unlike dogs or horses, rodents like mice and rats were seen as despicable creatures by most of the public, and therefore less worthy of moral consideration, which in turn deemed their use in research more acceptable [ ]. Firstly, they are small, easy to handle, and relatively cheap to house.
Secondly, they are highly resistant to successive inbreeding and have a short lifespan and rapid reproduction rate [ , ]. Domesticated rats Rattus norvegicus were the first rodent species to be used for scientific purposes. Their use in physiological research dates to as early as , but only in the first decades of the twentieth century did they become a preferred tool in research, after the development in of the first standard rat strain, the Wistar Rat , from which half of all rats used in laboratories today are estimated to have descended for a historical perspective, see [ , ] Figure 5.
The mouse Mus musculus had also been used in the nineteenth century, famously by Gregor Mendel in his s studies on heredity of coat color, until the local bishop censored mouse rearing as inappropriate for a priest, which made him turn to using peas instead [ ]. In John Gordon and Franck Ruddle developed the first transgenic mouse [ ], and in , the first gene knockout model was produced, which granted Mario R. Capecchi born , Martin J. Evans born , and Oliver Smithies born the Nobel Prize. In , the mouse became the second mammal, after humans, to have its whole genome sequenced.
These, along with other technologies, have opened unlimited possibilities for the understanding of gene function and their influence in several genetic and non-genetic diseases, and have made the mouse the most commonly used animal model in our day for a historical overview of the use of the mouse model in research, see [ , ] , with prospects being that it will continue to have a central role in biomedicine in the foreseeable future.
Two outbred laboratory rats, of the Lister Hooded Long—Evans strain. Opposition to animal experiments resurged in the second half of the twentieth century, in particular after the publication of Animal Liberation by Australian philosopher Peter Singer born [ ]. Singer offered a strong philosophical grounding for the animal rights movement, by arguing that the use of animals in research—as well as for food, clothing or any other purpose—is mostly based on the principle of speciesism coined by Richard Ryder in [ ] , under which animals are attributed a lower moral value on the sole basis of belonging to a different species [ ], which he considers to be no less justifiable than racism or sexism.
His argument, however, does not stem from the premise that animals have intrinsic rights. Furthermore, it is usually unfeasible to prospectively quantify how many may benefit directly from a given animal experiment. According to Singer, by using the principle of equal consideration of interests, one should give priority to relieving the greater suffering. Singer does not propose we should assume different species suffer similarly under the same conditions but, on the contrary, that care should be taken when comparing the interests of different species as, for instance, a human cancer patient, for his higher cognitive skills, can suffer a great deal more than a mouse with the same disease [ ].
For this reason, he does not consider animal research to always be morally wrong in principle, and even admits that in certain occasions it may be justifiable, albeit these situations are, in his view, exceptional [ ]. This perspective inherently affords vertebrates rights, despite their incapacity to understand or demand such rights, as it is also the case—Regan argues—of small infants and the severely mentally handicapped.
Hence, the respect for the life and wellbeing of sentient animals should be taken as absolute moral values, which can only be violated in very specific and extreme cases—such as self-defense. However, despite the diversity of philosophical views on the use of animals, the public debate on animal research would become polarized between animal rights activists and animal research advocates. While the first would uphold an uncompromising abolitionist stand, one could also find on the opposite side several persons who did not regard animal research as a moral issue at all [ ]. In the s, animal rights extremist groups began resorting to terrorist actions, thus becoming a serious problem for researchers and authorities in several Western countries still today.
These actions more often consist of trespassing, raiding animal facilities and laboratories, damage to property, harassment and death threats to researchers, their families and neighbors. It has also sometimes escalated into kidnapping, car and mail bombings, arson of homes and research facilities, mailing of AIDS-contaminated razorblades, and violence against scientists and their family members [ , ].
A large advertisement published in the 13 May edition of The Hour p. These dramatic and biased portraits of animal research are now more uncommon, as an increasing number of scientists acknowledge the need to be more candid and open to objective discussion over the possibilities and limitations of animal research, and of the scientific process altogether. In spite of the emergence of the animal rights movement, animal research for biomedical purposes was—as it continues to be—seen as morally acceptable by the majority of the public [ , ].
It became, however, increasingly evident that animal suffering was morally and socially relevant, and that an ethical balance between the benefits brought about by biomedical progress and the due consideration to animal wellbeing should be sought. However, whilst antivivisection movements would only re-emerge in the late s [ 5 , ], the need for a more humane science had already been acknowledged and addressed within the scientific community as early as the s.
They also challenged the commonly held belief that vertebrate animals—and mammals in particular—are always the most suitable models in biomedical research, a reasoning they called the high-fidelity fallacy. The Three Rs approach would provide an ethically and scientifically sound framework on which a reformist approach to the use of animals in biomedicine could be grounded. It would also set the stage for a more moderate advocacy of animal rights to appear: while remaining incompatible with an abolitionist animal rights perspective, this paradigm grants animals something like a right to protection from suffering, or at least certain suffering beyond a defined threshold [ ], preserving the central idea that there are absolute and non-negotiable limits to what can be done to animals.
Utilitarian philosopher Raymond G. As Peter Medawar had predicted in the s, the number of animals used in research would peak in the s and start to decline thereafter, although the number of biomedical papers has since then more than doubled [ , , , , , ]. This data is, however, limited to the Western world, as statistics on animal use in emerging countries such as India and China are unavailable [ ], and there is no way to assess if and, if so, to what extent the decline in numbers of animals used in Western countries may be attributed to the outsourcing of animal experiments to these emerging countries.
In recent years, the rise in the use of genetically modified animals has led to the stabilization of what would otherwise be a continuously downward trend [ , ] Figure 7.
This schematic illustration adapted with permission from an original by Professor Bert van Zupthen attempts to describe trends in the use of animals for scientific purposes in the Western world across time. It depicts the emergence of the first vivisection studies by classical Greek physicians, the absence of animal-based research—along with most medical and scientific research—across the Middle Ages, its resurgence in the Renaissance onwards, and the rapid increase in animal studies following the rise of science-based physiology and medicine in the nineteenth century.
The curves represented are nevertheless conjectural, as there are no reliable statistics on animal use for most of the period covered. Even nowadays it is hard to estimate trends in animal research, as data from several developed countries is insufficient for instance, in the United States, rodents, fish and birds are not accounted for in the statistics. The available data, however, suggest that the number of animals used in research and testing in the Western world peaked in the s, and decreased until the late s, or early s, to about half the number of 30 years earlier, and stabilizing in recent years.
While many, if not most, researchers do not foresee an end to animal experiments in biomedicine, the European Commission has nevertheless set full replacement of animal experiments as an ultimate goal [ ], and the Humane Society of the United States has the optimistic goal of full replacement by the year [ ].
- Planet Brahma.
- The Real History of the Rosicrucians.
- Hummingbirds, Pennies, and Hope?
- Les enquêtes du commissaire Léon 4 (French Edition).
The Three Rs would also become the overarching principle of several legislative documents regulating animal use in science since the s including the latest European legislation [ ]. Most recently, biomedical researchers in both industry and academia have also acknowledged the central importance of the Three Rs and the need for more transparency regarding animal use in biomedical research through the Basel Declaration [ , ].
More important, there are currently thousands of scientists devoted to the progress of animal welfare and development of alternatives to animal use in the life sciences. The historical controversy surrounding animal research is far from being settled. While the key arguments in this debate have not differed significantly since the rise of antivivisectionism in nineteenth-century England—and even before—we have since then moved a long way forward in regards to the protection of animals used in research and transparency regarding such use.
While animal experiments have played a vital role in scientific and biomedical progress and are likely to continue to do so in the foreseeable future, it is nonetheless important to keep focusing on the continuous improvement of the wellbeing of laboratory animals, as well as further development of replacement alternatives for animal experiments. Anna S. National Center for Biotechnology Information , U.
Journal List Animals Basel v. Animals Basel. Published online Mar Nuno Henrique Franco. Author information Article notes Copyright and License information Disclaimer. This article has been cited by other articles in PMC. Abstract Simple Summary This article reviews the use of non-human animals in biomedical research from a historical viewpoint, providing an insight into the most relevant social and moral issues on this topic across time, as well as to how the current paradigm for ethically and publically acceptable use of animals in biomedicine has been achieved.
Abstract The use of non-human animals in biomedical research has given important contributions to the medical progress achieved in our day, but it has also been a cause of heated public, scientific and philosophical discussion for hundreds of years. Keywords: animal research, animal testing, biomedical research, animal ethics, history of science.
Introduction Animal experimentation has played a central role in biomedical research throughout history. From Antiquity to the Renaissance Humans have been using other vertebrate animal species referred to henceforth as animals as models of their anatomy and physiology since the dawn of medicine. Seventeenth Century and the Dawn of the Enlightenment Physiological experiments on animals carried on throughout the seventeenth century, in the period favorable to scientific progress now known as the Age of Enlightenment.
Open in a separate window. Figure 1. Figure 2. Eighteenth Century and the Rise of Moral Consideration for Animals Amongst the many remarkable physiologists of the eighteenth century, polymaths Stephen Hales — and Albrecht von Haller — stood out. The Nineteenth-Century Medical Revolution and the Upsurge of the Antivivisection Societies By the beginning of the nineteenth century, medicine was undergoing a major revolution.
Figure 3. Figure 4. The Twentieth-Century Triumph of Science-Based Medicine By the end of the nineteenth and beginning of the twentieth century, the pharmacopeia had effective, scientifically tested drugs, a landmark that allowed for an increasing number of people to understand the importance and validity of scientifically sound medical knowledge and, with it, the relevance of animal-based research see [ , , , ]. Figure 5.
Animal Liberation and the Pathway for a More Humane Science Opposition to animal experiments resurged in the second half of the twentieth century, in particular after the publication of Animal Liberation by Australian philosopher Peter Singer born [ ]. Figure 6. Figure 7. Conclusion The historical controversy surrounding animal research is far from being settled. Conflict of Interest The author declares no conflict of interest.
References and Notes 1. Court W. Pharmacy from the ancient world to AD. In: Anderson S. Pharmaceutical Press; London, UK: Maehle A. Animal experimentation from antiquity to the end of the eighteenth century: Attitudes and arguments. In: Rupke N. Vivisection in Historical Perspective. Croom Helm; London, UK: Geller M. Phlegm and breath—Babylonian contributions to hippocratic medicine. In: Finkel I. Disease in Babylonia. Brill; Leiden, The Netherlands: Guerrini A. Andreas Vesalius of Brussels. Regan T. Animal Rights and Human Obligations. Prioreschi P. Experimentation and scientific method in the classical world: Their rise and decline.
Bacon F. The second book of francis bacon on the proficience and advancement of learning, divine and human originally published in In: Montague B.
Albans, and Lord High Chancellor of England. Descartes R. Animals are machines. In: Regan T. Rupke N. Boden M. Allen C. Animal consciousness. In: Zalta E. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Summer ed. Cottingham J. In: Moya G. Rene Descartes: Critical Assessments. Routledge; London, UK: Harrison P. Descartes on animals. Leiber J.
Ethical and Policy Issues in Research Involving Human Participants - Volume II
Descartes: The smear and related misconstruals. Theory Soc. Dennett D. Animal consciousness: What matters and why. Steiner G. Descartes on the moral status of animals. Steintrager J. Science and insensibility. In: Steintrager J. Cruel Delight: Enlightenment Culture and the Inhuman. Bayon H. A short note on his part in the history of medicine. Cartesian physiology. In: Gaukroger S. Spinoza B.
The Ethics. Locke J. Some Thoughts Concerning Education. Walker; Dublin, Ireland: Kant I. In: Lectures on Ethics. Schneewind J. Broadie A. Linzey A. Gregory A. Icon Books Ltd. Wear A. Early Modern Europe, — In: Conrad L. Shackelford J. William Harvey and the Mechanics of the Heart. McMullen E. Anatomy of a physiological discovery: William Harvey and the circulation of the blood. Cohen I. Scientific revolution. Beard D. Computational modeling of physiological systems. Grene M. Descartes, Harvey, and the emergence of modern mechanism; pp.