• English
    • français
    • Deutsch
    • español
    • português (Brasil)
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • русский
    • العربية
    • 中文
  • português (Brasil) 
    • English
    • français
    • Deutsch
    • español
    • português (Brasil)
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • русский
    • العربية
    • 中文
  • Entrar
Ver item 
  •   Página inicial
  • OAI Data Pool
  • OAI Harvested Content
  • Ver item
  •   Página inicial
  • OAI Data Pool
  • OAI Harvested Content
  • Ver item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Navegar

Todo o repositórioComunidades e ColeçõesPor data do documentoTítulosAssuntosAutoresEsta coleçãoPor data do documentoTítulosAssuntosAutoresProfilesView

Minha conta

EntrarCadastro

The Library

AboutNew SubmissionSubmission GuideSearch GuideRepository PolicyContact

Bias During the Evaluation of Animal Studies?

  • CSV
  • RefMan
  • EndNote
  • BibTex
  • RefWorks
Author(s)
Andrew Knight
Keywords
The Costs and Benefits of Animal Experiments
animal experiment
animal study
animal ethics
animal welfare
3Rs
utilitarian
bias
systematic review
Palgrave Macmillan Animal Ethics Series
Zoology
QL1-991
Science
Q
DOAJ:Zoology
DOAJ:Biology
DOAJ:Biology and Life Sciences
Veterinary medicine
SF600-1100
Show allShow less

Full record
Mostrar registro completo
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12424/1521607
Online Access
https://doaj.org/article/2b67ffcef27e4092829704392393faa3
Abstract
My recent book entitled The Costs and Benefits of Animal Experiments seeks to answer a key question within animal ethics, namely: is animal experimentation ethically justifiable? Or, more precisely, is it justifiable within the utilitarian cost:benefit framework that fundamentally underpins most regulations governing animal experimentation? To answer this question I reviewed more than 500 scientific publications describing animal studies, animal welfare impacts, and alternative research, toxicity testing and educational methodologies. To minimise bias I focused primarily on large-scale systematic reviews that had examined the human clinical and toxicological utility of animal studies. Despite this, Dr. Susanne Prankel recently reviewed my book in this journal, essentially accusing me of bias. However, she failed to provide any substantive evidence to refute my conclusions, let alone evidence of similar weight to that on which they are based. Those conclusions are, in fact, firmly based on utilitarian ethical reasoning, informed by scientific evidence of considerable strength, and I believe they are robust.
Date
2012-02-01
Type
Article
Identifier
oai:doaj.org/article:2b67ffcef27e4092829704392393faa3
10.3390/ani2010085
2076-2615
https://doaj.org/article/2b67ffcef27e4092829704392393faa3
Collections
OAI Harvested Content

entitlement

 
DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2021)  DuraSpace
Quick Guide | Entre em contato
Open Repository is a service operated by 
Atmire NV
 

Export search results

The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.