The institutional review board is an impediment to human research: the result is more animal-based research

Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 6:12 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Biomedical research today can be generally classified as human-based or nonhuman animal-based, each with separate and distinct review boards that must approve research protocols. Researchers wishing to work with humans or human tissues have become frustrated by the required burdensome approval panel, the Institutional Review Board. However, scientists have found it is much easier to work with the animal-based research review board, the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee. Consequently, animals are used for investigations even when scientists believe these studies should be performed with humans or human tissue. This situation deserves attention from society and more specifically the animal protection and patient advocate communities, as neither patients nor animals are well served by the present situation.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,130

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Utility of Basic Animal Research.Larry Carbone - 2012 - Hastings Center Report 42 (s1):12-15.
The Ethics of Animal Research: What Are the Prospects for Agreement?David Degrazia - 1999 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 8 (1):23-34.
A compassionate autonomy alternative to speciesism.Constance K. Perry - 2001 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 22 (3):237-246.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-06-08

Downloads
124 (#175,160)

6 months
30 (#117,216)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?