2. Determine the replicability and generality of prior research. 3. Increase understanding of the species under study. 4. Provide results that benefit the health or welfare of humans or other animals APA( 2014) My opinions were not really affected by the articles. I do not like the mistreatment of animals and if they are treated and respected for their sacrifice we as humans can accomplish many great things to advance our medical knowledge.
I do understand that some people have a passion for helping and their determination has made for great advances in the replacement of live animals with simulation animals and humans as well. If this can be done I would rather the scientists use the simulated animals instead of live ones. I believe I would advocate for stem cell research in animals because of all the good it could do for adults and children alike. When done correctly it can prevent or cure diseases that claim millions!
The Pros of stem cell research are many, for one this research can lead to cures for almost any disease caused by damaged organs or tissues as stem cells have the possibility to completely regenerate organs and tissues from any part of the body. Also the stem cell testing can lead to medical help for animals. I think the use of advanced technology, such as fMRI, will eventually make animal testing less common but not obsolete. In order for us to find out the results of new drugs or atmospheric change without “test subjects” would be very difficult.
The fMRI is very helpful in seeing what the results are from the testing. Using both would make the testing better. The safeguards I think would be needed in order to protect participants in studies using neuroimaging methods would be that we would need to consider if an abnormality identified in a brain image would be considered a disability, and if this abnormality would then be protected under Title 1 of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The answer to this question would likely influence the levels of privacy afforded to imaging results, as well as the degrees of stigma attached to them.
Ethical dilemmas generated by neuroimaging do not just lie in the production of these images. Just as many, if not more, of the dilemmas arise from the limitations in interpreting results and accurately conveying them to the public. When sharing the results of neuroimaging, neuroethicists must address topics such as privacy of unspoken thought and decision-making. Assignment of personal responsibility must be redefined and our concept, of how a “healthy” brain should look and function will be transformed. (“Progress report on,” 2007)