Bioethics in animal experimentation

1. Kolar, R., (2006), Animal experimentation, Science and Engineering Ethics, Volume 12 issue 1 2006, doi 10.1007%2Fs11948-006-0011-,1Search in Google Scholar

2. ***. (2005). Commission of the European Communities (2005) Fourth report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the statistics on the number of animals used for experimental and other scientific purposes in the member states of the European Union. COM(2005) 7 final, Brussels, 20.01.2005. http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/environment/chemicals/lab_animals/pdf/com_2005_7_en.pdf Retrieved 17.02.2015Search in Google Scholar

3. Sauer U.G., Spielmann H. & Rusche B. (2005). Fourth EU Report on the statistics on the number of animals used for scientific purposes in 2002 - trends, problems, conclusions. ALTEX 22: 19-24Search in Google Scholar

4. Sauer U.G. & Kolar R. (2000). Developments in the collection of statistical information on the number of animals used in experiments and other scientific purposes in the European Union. ATLA 28: 133-145Search in Google Scholar

5. British Pharmacological Society. Integrative Pharmacology Fund. Imperial College London Centre for Integrative Mammalian Physiology and Pharmacology.Search in Google Scholar

6. Monamy V. (2009). Animal Experimentation. A Guide to the Issues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511801808Search in Google Scholar

7. Mather J.A. (2001). Animal suffering: An invertebrate perspective. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science 4, 151-156.10.1207/S15327604JAWS0402_9Search in Google Scholar

8. Sherwin C.M. (2001). Can invertebrates suffer? Or, how robust is argument-by-analogy?. Animal Welfare 10, 103-118.10.1017/S0962728600023551Search in Google Scholar

9. Anon. (1986). Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. UK Home Office. http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/docs/animallegislation.html. Retrieved 17.02.2015Search in Google Scholar

10. Maehle A.-H. & Troehler, U. (1987). Animal experimentation from antiquity to the end of the eighteenth century: attitudes and arguments. Rupke, N.A. (ed.), Vivisection in Historical Perspective, 14–47. London: Croom Helm.Search in Google Scholar

11. Linzey, A. & Clarke, P.A.B. (2004). Animal Rights: A Historical Anthology. Irvington, NY: Columbia University Press.Search in Google Scholar

12. Bliss, M. (1982). The Discovery of Insulin. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

13. Sharpe, R. (1988). The Cruel Deception: The Use of Animals in Medical Research Wellingborough, Northamptonshire: Thorsons Publishers Limited, p. 90. F. I. McMahon, Medical World News 168, 6 (1968) cited in Ibid., indicates that only one out of twenty drugs tested safe and effective on nonhuman animals are safe and effective for humans after clinical trials.Search in Google Scholar

14. Sharpe, R. 1988. The Cruel Deception: The Use of Animals in Medical Research Wellingborough, Northamptonshire: Thorsons Publishers Limited, op. cit., p. 78, 105Search in Google Scholar

15. Sztybel, D. (2006). A Living Will Clause for Supporters of Animal Experimentation. Journal of Applied Philosophy. 23(2). doi 10.1111%2Fj.1468-5930.2006.00338.x.10.1111/j.1468-5930.2006.00338.x17036430Search in Google Scholar

16. Anon. (1986). Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. UK Home Office. http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/docs/animallegislation.html. Retrieved 20.10.2014Search in Google Scholar

17. French, R.D. (1975). Antivivisection and Medical Science in Victorian Society. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Search in Google Scholar

18. Ryder, R.D. (2000). Animal Revolution: Changing Attitudes Towards Speciesism, second edition. Oxford: Berg Publishers.Search in Google Scholar

19. Phillips, M.T. & Sechzer, J.A. (1989). Animal Research and Ethical Conflict: An Analysis of the Scientific Literature 1966–1986. New York: Springer Verlag.10.1007/978-1-4612-3620-7Search in Google Scholar

20. Poole, T. (ed.) (1999). UFAW Handbook on the Care and Management of Laboratory Animals, Vol. 1, Terrestrial Vertebrates. Oxford: Blackwell Science.Search in Google Scholar

21. Pifer L., Shimizu K. & Pifer R..(1994) Public attitudes toward animal research: some international comparisons. Society and Animals: Journal of Human-Animal Studies 2, 2. http://www.psyeta.org, the website of Psychologists for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. Retrieved 20.10.201410.1163/156853094X00126Search in Google Scholar

22. UK Home Office 2007. Statistics of Scientific Procedures on Living Animals, Great Britain 2006. London: The Stationery Office. http://www.archive2.official-documents.co.uk/document/cm62/6291/6291-old.pdf. Retrieved 20.10.2014.Search in Google Scholar

23. UK Home Office 2008a. Animals in Scientific Procedures: Better Regulation. http://scienceandresearch.homeoffice.gov.uk/animal-research/better-regulation/. Retrieved 20.10.2014.Search in Google Scholar

24. Hamm, T.E., Dell, R.B. & Van Sluyters, R.C. (1995). Laboratory animal care policies and regulations: United States. Institute for Laboratory Animal Research Journal 37: 75–8.Search in Google Scholar

25. FRAME Toxicity Committee (1991). Animals and alternatives in toxicology: present status and future prospects. Alternatives to Laboratory Animals 19: 116–38.Search in Google Scholar