As biologists we study life because we feel that it is an exceptional phenomenon. We treasure biological diversity and are concerned about the well-being of all living things - so how come that biologists kill so damn many living things in their attempt to understand it? I personally have struggled with this very question for a long time and it still pains me no end to harm a critter in pursuit of knowledge. This point was brought home in a particularly strong way during my research on brain morphology of African Great Lake cichlids - mouth breeding fish with complex social system, large behavioral repertoires, and beautiful coloration. In anaesthetized fish my experimental design called for rinsing out the blood with ringer solution and then infusion of formalin fixative in order to preserve the brain tissue for anatomical and histological studies. It always was a gut-wrenching moment when the saline was replaced by fixative and the color drained out of the fish along with its life. The only way I could justify this to myself was that I believed in the validity and significance of the research question. Moreover, I had made sure that my experimental design was sound and appropriate for answering the question using as few individuals as possible and that it involved a minimum of suffering for them. I feel strongly about this issue and encourage such concerns in my students as well. - Robert Huber 7/15/99
On the Decline of Animal Research in Academic Psychology
For various reasons, the amount of animal brain research, as a percentage of research being done in psychology departments of American universities, has diminished markedly over the last few decades. This has occurred for several reasons: because of the difficulty of such research, because more and more psychologists do not appreciate the relevance of this type of research for understanding human problems, and because of a new wave of ethical considerations and regulations promoted by individuals who have grave concerns about the propriety of doing experimental work on captive animals. It is this last issue that has become a vexing concern for biologists, neuroscientists, and many others who wish to study animals, either out of pure curiosity or from a desire to understand aspects of the human mind and body that cannot be understood in any other way.
Although the ethics of using animals in research has been debated with increasing fervor, it is certain that our knowledge of the human brain and body would be primitive were it not for such work. Without animal research, many children would still be dying of juvenile diabetes and numerous other diseases. However, it would be foolish to deny that much of this research has indeed caused distress in animals. For that reason, some biologically-oriented investigators may not want to deal forthrightly with the nature of animal emotions and subjectivity. However, I believe that most brain scientists support the humane treatment of their animal subjects, even as they make the necessary ethical compromises to obtain new knowledge. Most investigators regard their subjects as fellow animals who deserve their full respect and care.
Since this book seeks to deal with the reality of emotions in the animal and human brain, it is important to clarify my personal position on the propriety of animal brain research at the outset. I will do this in the form of an "Afterthought"--a stylistic medium I will use throughout this book. "Afterthought" is not meant to imply that the material is not important. It is used to give focused attention to key issues, especially historical or conceptual ones, that do not fit well in the main text. Indeed, the "Afterthoughts" will often highlight the most critical issues, such as the following concern that all sensitive people must have about biological research on live animals.
AFTERTHOUGHT: A Brief Discussion of the Ethics of Animal Research. I summarized my side of the debate over animal research at a conference entitled "Knowledge through Animals" at the University of Salzburg (September 23, 1992). Let me share the abstract of that presentation, which was entitled "Animals and Science: Sacrifices for Knowledge." It is a viewpoint that permeates this book and summarizes my personal research values:
"The debate over the use of live animals in behavioral and biomedical research cannot be resolved by logic. It is an emotional issue which ultimately revolves around the question of whether other animals affectively experience the world and themselves in a way similar to humans -- as subjectively feeling, sentient creatures. The topic of subjectivity is one that modern neuroscience has avoided. It is generally agreed that there are no direct, objective ways to measure the subjectivity of other animals, nor indeed of other humans. Only their words and actions give us clues about their inner experiences. But if we consider actions to be valid indicators of internal states in humans, we should also be ready to grant internally experienced feelings to other animals. Indeed, it is possible that the very nature of the brain cannot be fathomed until neuroscience comes to terms with this potential function of the nervous system -- the generation of internal representations, some of which are affectively experienced states which establish value structures for animals. A balanced evaluation of the evidence, as well as a reasonable evolutionary account of the nature of the mammalian brain, support the conclusion that other animals also have what may be termed "emotional feelings." Accordingly, our research enterprises with animals should recognize this fact, and aspire to new levels of sensitivity that has not always characterized animal research practices of the past. The practice of animal research has to be a trade-off between our desire to generate new and useful knowledge for the betterment of the human condition, and our wish not to impose stressors on other creatures which we would not impose on ourselves. Those who pursue animal research, need to clearly recognize these trade-offs, and address them forthrightly. Indeed, a clearer recognition of these issues may have benefits for certain areas of investigation, such as behavioral brain research, by promoting more realistic conceptions of the nature of brain mechanisms that have long been empirically neglected (e.g., the emotions). It may also promote heightened respect for the many creatures we must study if we are to ever understand the deeply biological nature of human values."
Although animal research will surely not reveal why humans have strong emotions regarding issues such as abortion, rape, and the many civil injustices that still characterize our society and our world, it can provide a substantive answer to questions such as what it means to be angry, scared, playful, happy and sad. If we understand these important brain processes at a deep neurobiological level (an end result that can be achieved only with animal brain research) we will better understand the fundamentally affective nature of the human mind. Thereby, we will also be in a better position to help animals and humans who are in emotional distress. The aim of this book is to nurture the growth of such knowledge.