Vivisection - SpeedyLook encyclopedia

Animal vivisection

It is one of the aspects of the animal Expérimentation, several regulations national and international oblige to place under Anesthésie the vivisectionnés animals.

Criticisms

The criticism of vivisection is very often placed within the more general framework of that of the animal experimentation.

Its scientific utility, and its ethical justificability are the subject of violent controversies. Many movements animalists place the abolition of this experimentation among its main aims. Among the antivivisectionnists, the ones support that the experimentation on the animals is scientifically ineffective and that it is possible to replace it by other methods; the others (for example those which want to promote the animal Bien-être) judge that the animal experimentation must be condemned in the field of morals, without one having to know if it is useful or not for medical and scientific progress.

About the utility of vivisection, the position of the scientific community is generally on the other hand. Because of the limits of the modeling of alive, many biologists and doctors estimate that the recourse to the animal is sometimes irreplaceable, for example when it is a question of studying simultaneously the impacts nervous, hormonal and humoraux of a pathology on the organization. However, research vivisectionites is not limited to pathologies referred to above. They extend to the cosmetics, with research space, military… In the same way, some stress that more the economic interest is large plus the means are granted to you. Namely that research in beauty care is most consuming animals.

However, inside the scientific community of the voices rise to question the utility of the animal experiments and the reliability of their results. A tragic example of false conclusions obtained through this kind of experiments arised in the business of the Thalidomide, tested initially on animals and which showed themselves then catastrophic for the human beings. That does not give however causes the use of the animal model of it, this incident occurred because of the use of only one species, which in this precise case had a reaction distant from that of the Man.

In the majority of the Western countries vivisection is the legislative regulation object which imposes, for example, the use of the Anesthésie in all these cases where that does not harm the effectiveness of the experimentation.

Human vivisection

Vivisection was practiced a long time on being human and it was essential for the development of the medical field. However, human vivisection had an animated history. Hérophile, “father of the Anatomy” and founder of the first medical college with Alexandria, was shown by the religious leader Tertullien to have practiced vivisection on at least 600 prisoners.

During the Second world war, at the time of the Expansionism of Japan Showa, the Japanese general Shiro Ishii established in the Far East a bacteriological network of research units of which one of the principal activities was the vivisection of several thousands of human, of which women and children.

In 2006, 84 years the army medical officer Akira Makino, admitted having proceeded between December 44 and February 45 to amputations and vivisections on Filipino prisoners and in particular of the children whereas it was in station with Mindanao.

“I could not refuse to obey the orders and I did something of cruel. ” confessed the veteran of unit 33 of the imperial navy. “I would have been carried out if I had refused to obey the orders. It was the rule at the time. We should not remake these horrors. I have the responsibility to reveal the truth on the war. ”

According to Makino, vivisections could last between 10 minutes and 3 hours. The members were initially cut, then the bodies were withdrawn one by one. The operations were carried out every three days and ceased at the time of the unloading of the American soldiers.

In 2007, Ken Yuasa, doctor having practiced of 1942 to 1945 of vivisections in a military hospital of the Shanxi, affirmed that at least thousand Japanese, including doctors, took part in vivisections in China.

The doctor Fukujiro Ishiyama made in the same way within the Unité 731 and with the imperial University hospital Kyūshū

In Germany, the doctor Josef Mengele practiced human vivisections on prisoners taken in concentration camps.

Following the experiments Nazi, the medical profession adopted the Code of Nuremberg like an international deontology, which does not prohibit however vivisection on human beings. The latter can thus agree to lend themselves to aggressive experiments likely to require, for example, a sampling of fabric (of the Biopsie S), or other procedures which require voluntariate. These procedures must be approved from a point of view moral and carried out in a way which to the minimum reduces the long-term pain and health risks of the patient. In spite of that, the term is generally felt like pejorative: one would never make use of it when it is a question of saving the life of a patient. The use of this term when they are human beings almost always implies an absence of assent.

Reference

Random links:

Gilles Delion | Raimo Heino | Nintendo EAD Tokyo | Somewhere in England | Michel Cardoni