Empatía para una ciencia sin sufrimiento animal: un enfoque desde Lori Gruen
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1344/rbd2021.51.31257Keywords:
experimentación animal, investigación con animales, sufrimiento animal, ética animal, ética del cuidado, empatía, Lori GruenAbstract
La rigidez de posturas en torno a la experimentación con animales ha frustrado la posibilidad de converger en un terreno común. Es por ello que desde el ámbito jurídico, político y ético, ha de reforzarse la alianza con ese grupo cada vez más numeroso de personas que conciben una ciencia libre de sufrimiento animal. Precisamente con el ánimo de reafirmar estas voces, y confiando en que la empatía en la ciencia sea capaz de trascender lo meramente humano, se plantea la oportunidad de que sean respaldadas desde el enfoque de la ética del cuidado.References
Akhtar, A. (2012). Animals and Public Health: Why Treating Animals Better is Critical to Human Welfare. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Akhtar, A. (2015). The Flaws and Human Harms of Animal Experimentation. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 24(4), 407-419. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963180115000079
Almiron, N., y Khazaal, N. (2016). Lobbying Against Compassion: Speciesist Discourse in the Vivisection Industrial Complex. American Behavioral Scientist, 60(3), 256-275. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764215613402
Bailey, J., Thew, M., y Balls, M. (2013). An Analysis of the Use of Dogs in Predicting Human Toxicology and Drug Safety. Alternatives to Laboratory Animals, 41(5), 335-350. https://doi.org/10.1177/026119291304100504
Bailey, J., Thew, M., y Balls, M. (2014). An Analysis of the Use of Animal Models in Predicting Human Toxicology and Drug Safety. Alternatives to Laboratory Animals, 42(3), 181-199. https://doi.org/10.1177/026119291404200306
Balls, M., y Combes, R. D. (2016). Animal Experimentation: The Statistics Speak for Themselves. Alternatives to Laboratory Animals, 44(6), 511-513. https://doi.org/10.1177/026119291604400605
Balls, M., y Combes, R. D. (2017). Animal Experimentation and Alternatives: Revealed Preferences. Alternatives to Laboratory Animals, 45(1), 1-3. https://doi.org/10.1177/026119291704500103
Barnes, D. J. (1987). The Case Against the Use of Animals in Science. En M. W. Fox y L. D. Mickley (Eds.), Advances in Animal Welfare Science 1986/87 (215-226). Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Bekoff, M., Gruen, L., Townsend, S. E., y Rollin, B. E. (1992). Animals in science: some areas revisited. Animal Behaviour, 44(3), 473-484. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-3472(92)90057-G
Biller-Andorno, N., Grimm, H., y Walker, R. L. (2015). Professionalism and ethics in animal research. Nature Biotechnology, 33(10), 1027-1028.
Bowles, E. (2018). The Myth of Replacement and the Legal Reality. Alternatives to Laboratory Animals, 46(1), 39-41.
Comisión Europea (2020). Informe de 2019 sobre las estadísticas relativas al uso de animales con fines científicos en los Estados miembros de la Unión Europea en 2015-2017. COM/2020/16 final. Recuperado de https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/ES/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52020DC0016
Corporate Europe Observatory (2012). Divide & Conquer: A look behind the scenes of the EU pharmaceutical industry lobby. Recuperado de https://corporateeurope.org/sites/default/files/28_march_2012_divideconquer.pdf
Corporate Europe Observatory (2015). Policy prescriptions: The firepower of the EU pharmaceutical lobby and implications for public health. Recuperado de https://corporateeurope.org/sites/default/files/20150904_bigpharma_web.pdf
Cuomo, C. J., y Gruen, L. (1998). On Puppies and Pussies: Animals, Intimacy, and Moral Distance. En B-A. Bar On y A. Ferguson (Eds.), Daring to be good: essays in feminist ethico-politics (p. 129-142). New York: Routledge.
Donovan, J. (1996). Attention to Suffering: A feminist caring ethic for the treatment of animals. Journal of Social Philosophy 27(1), 81-102. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9833.1996.tb00228.x
Donovan, J. (2006). Feminism and the Treatment of Animals: From Care to Dialogue. Signs 31(2), 305-329.
European Patient’s Academy (2015). Key principles of pharmacology. Recuperado de https://www.eupati.eu/non-clinical-studies/key-principles-pharmacology/
Gruen, L. (2009). Attending to Nature: Empathetic Engagement with the More than Human World. Ethics and the Environment, 14(2), 23-38.
Gruen, L. (2011). Ethics and Animals: An Introduction. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Gruen, L. (2012). Navigating Difference (again): Animal Ethics and Entangled Empathy. En G. R. Smulewicz-Zucker (Ed.), Strangers to Nature: Animal Lives and Human Ethics (p. 213-234). Lanham, Maryland: Lexington Books.
Gruen, L. (2013). Entangled empathy: an alternative approach to animal ethics. En R. Corbey y A. Lanjouw (Eds.), The Politics of Species: Reshaping our Relationships with Other Animals (p. 223-231). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Gruen, L. (2015). Entangled Empathy: An Alternative Ethic for Our Relationships with Animals. New York: Lantern Books.
Gruen, L. (2017). Expressing Entangled Empathy: A Reply. Hypatia, 32(2), 452-462. https://doi.org/10.1111/hypa.12326
Gruen, L. (2018). Empathy in mind. En K. Andrews y J. Beck (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of philosophy of animal minds (p. 485-490). New York: Routledge.
Herrmann, K. (2019). Refinement on the Way Towards Replacement: Are We Doing What We Can? En K. Herrmann y K. Jayne (Eds.), Animal Experimentation: Working Towards a Paradigm Change (p. 3-64). Leiden, Boston: Brill.
Knight, A. (2019). Critically Evaluating Animal Research. En K. Herrmann y K. Jayne (Eds.), Animal Experimentation: Working Towards a Paradigm Change (p. 321-340). Leiden, Boston: Brill.
Kolar, R. (2006). Animal Experimentation. Science and Engineering Ethics, 12(1), 111-122.
Kolar, R. (2015). How Long Must They Suffer? Success and Failure of our Efforts to End the Animal Tragedy in Laboratories. Alternatives to Laboratory Animals, 43(2), 129-143. https://doi.org/10.1177/026119291504300206
Leyton, F. (2010). Problemas Bioéticos de la experimentación con Animales no-Humanos. dA. Derecho Animal: Forum of Animal Law Studies, 1(3), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/da.203
Leyton, F. (2014). Bioética frente a los derechos animales: tensión en las fronteras de la filosofía moral (Tesis doctoral, Universitat de Barcelona). http://hdl.handle.net/10803/292240
Leyton, F. (2019). Los animales en la bioética: Tensión en las fronteras del antropocentrismo. Barcelona: Herder Editorial.
Parlamento Europeo (2010). Directiva 2010/63/UE del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo, de 22 de septiembre de 2010, relativa a la protección de los animales utilizados para fines científicos. Diario Oficial de la Unión Europea, L 276, 33-79.
Rollin, B. E. (2006). Animal Rights and Human Morality (3a ed.). New York: Prometheus Books.
Rollin, B. E. (2012). Ethics and Animal Research. En J. R. Garrett (Ed.), The Ethics of Animal Research: Exploring the Controversy (p. 19-30). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Taylor, K. (2019). Recent Developments in Alternatives to Animal Testing. En K. Herrmann y K. Jayne (Eds.), Animal Experimentation: Working Towards a Paradigm Change (p. 585-609). Leiden, Boston: Brill.
Téllez Ballesteros, E. E., y Vanda Cantón, B. (2019). La enseñanza con animales en las ciencias biomédicas: un modelo injusto que se perpetúa. Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios Críticos Animales, VI(II), 139-153. http://revistaleca.org/journal/index.php/RLECA/article/view/241
Walker, M. U. (1989). Moral Understandings: Alternative “Epistemology” for a Feminist Ethics. Hypatia, 4(2), 15-28.
Wellcome (2020). What researchers think about the culture they work in. Recuperado de https://wellcome.ac.uk/sites/default/files/what-researchers-think-about-the-culture-they-work-in.pdfDownloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
The author retains the copyright and grants Revista de Bioética y Derecho the right of first publication of the article. All articles published in Revista de Bioética y Derecho are under Creative Commons licensing Recognition – Non Commercial – NoDerivedArtwork (by-nc-nd 4.0), which allows sharing the content with third parties, provided that they acknowledge its authorship, initial publication in this journal and the terms of the license. No commercial use of the original work or generation of derivative works is permitted.