1986/10/02 by Carl I. Cohen · 363 citations
Veterinary · Medicine · #Animal testing and alternatives #Creatures #Dismissal #Animal rights #Medicine #Law and economics #Law #Epistemology #Philosophy #Political science #Sociology #History #Natural (archaeology)
paper · doi:10.1056/nejm198610023151405
published in New England Journal of Medicine 315(14), 865-870 (Massachusetts Medical Society)
openalex publication_date 1986/10/02 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/31
USING animals as research subjects in medical investigations is widely condemned on two grounds: first, because it wrongly violates the rights of animals,1 and second, because it wrongly imposes on sentient creatures much avoidable suffering.2 Neither of these arguments is sound. The first relies on a mistaken understanding of rights; the second relies on a mistaken calculation of consequences. Both deserve definitive dismissal.Why Animals Have No RightsA right, properly understood, is a claim, or potential claim, that one party may exercise against another. The target against whom such a claim may be registered can be a single . . .