PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Bernard E Rollin

Publications and source records attributed to Bernard E Rollin.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

The regulation of animal research and the emergence of animal ethics: a conceptual history.

The history of the regulation of animal research is essentially the history of the emergence of meaningful social ethics for animals in society. Initially, animal ethics concerned itself solely with cruelty, but this was seen as inadequate to late 20(th)-century concerns about animal use. The new social ethic for animals was quite different, and its conceptual bases are explored in this paper. The Animal Welfare Act of 1966 represented a very minimal and in many ways incoherent attempt to regulate animal research, and is far from morally adequate. The 1985 amendments did much to render coherent the ethic for laboratory animals, but these standards were still inadequate in many ways, as enumerated here. The philosophy underlying these laws is explained, their main provisions are explored, and future directions that could move the ethic forward and further rationalize the laws are sketched.

Animal Experimentation↗
PubMed2006

Report of the Working Group on Animal Distress in the Laboratory.

Finding ways to minimize pain and distress in research animals is a continuing goal in the laboratory animal research field. Pain and distress, however, are not synonymous, and measures that alleviate one may not affect the other. Here, the authors provide a summary of a meeting held in February 2004 that focused on distress in laboratory animals. They discuss the difficulties associated with defining 'distress,' propose methods to aid in recognizing and alleviating distressful conditions, and provide recommendations for animal research conduct and oversight that would minimize distress experienced by laboratory animals.

Animal Care Committees↗
PubMed2006

Food safety--who is responsible?

Though scientists believe that issues of risk can be handled without appeal to values in general or ethics in particular, this is demonstrably false. The very notion of risk is enmeshed in a complex of social ethics. This is clearly true with regard to food safety. With this in mind, it is plausible to affirm that responsibility for food safety at a given point in the chain from producer to consumer rests with the person or entity under whose control the management of that risk most plausibly lies. This principle is illustrated with various examples and with clear cases of industry shouldering and avoiding responsibility. An additional ethical concern relevant to food safety arises from genetically modified foods. Given that the situation here is uncertain and risk unknown, it is hard to see who is responsible for managing such risks. It is arguable that this situation militates in favor of labeling, since consumers are in effect research subjects. The reasonable moral approach to risk we have outlined is jeopardized by the societal tendency towards "victimology" and abrogation of personal responsibility. In such a world, it is incumbent on industry to educate the public with regard to consumer minimization of food safety risks, the impossibility of zero-risk situations, and the economic costs to freedom of protectionism.

Animals↗