Sonia T. Felipe

Scientists and researchers investigating diseases that afflict humans are trained in research centers in the criminal practice of vivisection, prohibited by law 9.605, of 12 February 1998, when there are substitute methods. In many cases, vivisection is the only method in which the scientific intelligence receives training. Over the last forty years, biomedical research efforts focused on experiments with "models" obtained at the expense of the suffering and death of non-human animals, used to mirror the diseases produced in a physical environment and human mental. Among these are cancer, the vascular accidents, Hypertension, to hipercolesterolemia, o diabetes, multiple sclerosis, neurological degenerations known as Parkinson's and Alzheimer's, the "depression" and other forms of psychological distress. Ratos, mice, dogs, apes, horses, Pigs and poultry are sold in the market vivisector.

Just to give an example: It has been estimated to be 2, 6 millions of humans suffering from multiple sclerosis around the planet. Medicines obtained from the vivisection of rodents failed. Scientists recognized that the cause of the disease is "environmental", ela contribuindo for different genes, not just a. The medications available today, of microbial origin, not the result of vivisection, but the codification of physico-chemical structure of these (Greek & Greek, Specious Science).

There are those diseases of genetic origin or hereditary, what would be the scientific purpose in insisting on the architecture of the animal model to seek their healing?

Perhaps one can know the answer, looking at the financial interests (real "human benefits"?), in the base game, around and behind the activity vivisector academic and business that it covers. Referring to the price list of companies that provide genetically modified mice for research vivisectors, eg, begin to have an idea of ​​what lies behind the argument of "human benefit", vivisectors who advocates the legalization of this practice unethical use as a shield to protect themselves from criticism abolitionists.

The research on live animals "benefits human interests": the price of a genetically modified mouse, to name just a kind used in vivisection, can range from U $ 100,00 a U$ 15.000,00 unidade dollars. The fixtures for the proper handling of such an animal are not offered for prices comrades. An apparatus for killing, in a "humanitarian", Animals used in the study, disabling them the brain enzymes, cost somewhere around $ U 70.000,00 unit. Devices to contain rats, dogs, cats and monkeys, can cost between $ 4.500,00 a U$ 8.500,00 unit. The "producers" of animals are also part of this chain that forms the "dependence of science in relation to vivisseccção", without which it can not survive today, and to which life and human health are cuffed.

In 1999, relatam Greek & Greek, the sale of mice in the United States alcançou 200 million. The other animals reached 140 million. But, the "human benefits" to which vivisectors refer in their public defense of the regulation of vivisection in Brazil, not restricted to what entrepreneurs livestock producers and device manufacturers to contain them in animal facilities and laboratories bill. Also publishers of magazines, newspapers and books are part of the human community "benefited" by vivisection. And, finally, human benefit most spectacular is the turnover of chemical and pharmaceutical industry, a chain of business to which they are linked all pharmacies around the planet and all the people who buy allopathic medicines in the hope of cure or relief from their ailments, and processed foods, whose components have led the animals to suffer the Draize Test and LD 50.

But, when vivisectors publish articles advocating the legalization of their practice unethical, the killing of animals for inventing models that can mirror human diseases, knowing that each agency has its own environmental reality and there is a medium that can cure the same disease in all subjects, because each develops a peculiarly, the "financial benefits" and "academic benefits" accumulated in all links of this chain are hidden vivisector reader. Nobody publishes, Brazil, one detailed account of the amount allocated by the funding agencies for research vivisector. Therefore, we are not aware of the costs of failure vivisector (AIDS, cancer, Parkinson, Alzheimer, multiple sclerosis, diabetes, cholesterol, environmental diseases, more than genetic).

Animal research led the pharmaceutical industry to peak in the last twenty years. Not casually, these last twenty years, multiplied deaths from circulatory failure, hypertension, diabetes, cancer, degenerative neurological syndromes, hepatic cirrhosis and infections. The environmental component of human ills can not be mirrored in the body of rats and mice. At the same time, vivisectors insist on defending the law to legalize their practice, implying the lay public that vivisection is "out" for the healing of human ills. His articles "scientific" are not effective, nor about their peers vivisectors. How could produce effects on human health? 80% Articles published in the journal are cited at most once in other vehicles, and 50% Articles vivisectors are never cited, either in the same, is in other journals (Greek &Greek). The millions of animals killed for such articles are published and their authors in the account for their academic productivity, had their lives destroyed for no other "human benefit", unless the authors give the title of Master and Doctor, or scholarships productivity.
These are the real "human benefits" practice vivisector, of which no one can give?

---

Sonia T. Felipe, Dr. em moral philosophy and political theory pela University of Konstanz, Germany, member of the Bioethics Institute of the Luso-American Development, FLAT; postdoctoral fellow in bioethics with cutout animal ethics, Professor and Researcher, UFSC, Eastern Monographs, dissertations and theses in bioethics, ética animal, environmental ethics, human rights and theories of justice. Author of, Ethics and animal experimentation: abolitionists basics (Edufsc, 2007) and As a matter of principle (Cripple, 2003). Collaborator of Animal Magazine Pensata, www.sentiens.net.