Custom Human Experimentation essay paper sample
Buy custom Human Experimentation essay paper cheap
Over time controversy has arisen over scientific experimentation on human beings. The controversies behind the use of human beings in the experiment are concerned with the ethical aspects that surround it. According to the protagonists, experimenting on human beings is not wrong as they are just like animals. On the other hand, the antagonists oppose the experimentation on human beings as it could cause harm to someone’s body. Indeed, there is no way experimentation can be barred. However, there is a need to consider the points of the proponents who support experimentation on human beings besides, the view of the opponents who are in conflict with the experimentation on human beings.
Without doubt, a large group of individuals who have declared their support based on their view that there is nothing wrong with experimenting on human beings. Some of the reasons that the protagonists hold include those of clinician’s view who believe there would be no medicine if experimentation was not there. According to Uwe Eckart, scientific and therapeutic experimentations cannot be done if human beings are not used as the basis for experimentation (pg. 40). Therefore, the us of human beings in medicine experimentation is necessary as they are not similar to animals. However, they do instigate that the procedure should be procedural with care not to affect the human beings that assist in experimentation. It is therefore, a necessity for development and improvement of the medication offered in healthcare today, experimentation must be done consistently.
On the contrary, the antagonists have their own reasons in the opposition of experimentation on human beings. This is mainly based on ethical and moral aspects that arise from the experiments. Some antagonist believes that not every man is able to undergo suffering of others as this will not be resistible in their minds. According to Mercius human beings have a feeling of misery and suffering (Chan, pg. 65). For this reason, they would not wish for their fellow human beings to be used for experiments. They, therefore, stand against the experiments that should be done on human beings as it could be dangerous in their lives and could even cost their lives. In addition, Aristotle held that animals had a sense, and through this, they can learn. It is therefore, hard for them to forget events. Thus, this makes human experimentation as uncoonscious to the feelings of individuals.
Other antagonists believed that by carrying out an experiment on human beings, especially as it defied the ethical and moral grounds (Zeiderman, pg. 124). Uwe Eckart, points out the fact that experiments are carried out fundamentally in hospitals where the poor and weak health-plan patients visit shows lack of dignity as the private patients are spared out from research (pg. 41). According to the antagonists, the experimentation on human beings is not legal especially with the effects on human bodies. For this reason, it is not carried out on the rich.
In conclusion, experimentation of a human being is unethical and immoral. It is therefore, not necessary for scientists to use human beings for experiment at the cost of their death. They should instead look out for ways of researching other than experimenting on human beings and especially the poor who cannot stand up for themselves. It is necessary for those who propose in favor of experimentation on human beings to position themselves as the ones to be used for experiment and whether or not they will accept to attest to the pain and harm that come along with experimentation.