Laerte F. Levai, Thales Tréz, Sheila Moura

Brazilian researchers, with the statement that the use of animals is essential for the production of new substances, medication and technical research, seem to discredit the ability of science to overcome new challenges. The scientistic argument seems to make a convenient reading and partial history, mistakenly arguing that the results of animal experiments are reliable man.

Why our scientists boast of increasing the number of teachers and doctors trained here each year, while omit the government pays £ 3.300,00 monthly to keep them in the country? In terms of statistics called scientific, that is to say, one should not confuse quality with quantity.

The academic class seeks to maintain its tradition and status, even if it has to refer to advances in numbers, not in scientific relevance. É um engano, however, believe that animal experimentation has magical results (result of a scientific thought canonical) and it can save lives. Ratos, dogs, monkeys and other, decidedly, are not humans.

In addition, the way has been performed in most laboratories, research centers or schools, animal testing is an activity steeped in ideology dominant scientific (without commitment to emerging talent), where animals – taken as objects of study or disposable parts – are treated as if they were creatures ethically neutral. Under the pretext of seeking the progress of science, researcher holds, Hurts, breaking, Scalpel, penetrates, burn, sectioned, mutila e mata, making a real massacre consented. This all despite the known existence of alternative resources that most vivisectors will not hear, and the constitutional provision which prohibits the submission of cruelty to animals.

With regard to PL 1153/95 (the then Sérgio Arouca), that transacts há 12 years in Brasilia, Your text is retrograde and has the support of animal protection societies, also civil society. Already presented in PL parallel 2003 by Congresswoman Iara Bernardi and unfairly rejected by the Committee on Constitution and Justice, animal experimentation was so much higher, prioritizing the use of substitute resources, ensuring conscientious objection and, yet, sealing repeated experiments whose results are known scientist.

Possible approval of PL Sérgio Arouca not be a final step, even a breakthrough for science. Just remember that the legislature has environmental crime didactic and scientific experimentation on animals, when unapplied substitutes existing resources. This legal restriction contradicts economic interests moved by the powerful medical industries, cosmetic and pharmaceutical, besides causing problems for those who use animals in research.

The information available today on the indices of cruelty to animals subjected to animal testing, well as the recognition that animal use in research is a methodological error can harm the man himself, led respected professionals, especially in developed countries, a necessary paradigm shift, Instead of abolishing vivisection. What is lacking in the class of Brazilian researchers, however, is daring to look ahead, believe that it is possible to reconcile ethical scientific activity.