Pros And Cons Of Chimpanzee

917 Words2 Pages

Should policies on chimpanzee use in biomedical research be revised, if at all? In the past decades, thousands of chimpanzees have been tested on in order to benefit humankind. Chimpanzees have been useful in developing medical research as they are the closest relatives of humans and have been subject to testing due to the belief that humans should not be tested on. Whereas others would argue against the genetic similarities between the two species as well as the cruel conditions of testing on primates. Therefore, chimpanzee testing must be regulated…
Chimpanzees are genetically more similar to humans than other animals, including the apes. They are noted as being 98-99% genetically identical to humans, which has been recently confirmed (NEAVS). …show more content…

The overall similarity when taking into consideration relevant factors is around 95% or as low as 93% (BAILEY). Therefore, there are genes in humans that are completely absent in the chimpanzee, or vice versa. Humans and chimpanzees share a common ancestral relative, but between 5 and 3.5 million years ago, there was an evolutionary split between the two species, and therefore, there were duplication and deletion of large genomic regions (BAILEY). Since the split, humans gained 689 genes and had lost 86 genes, whereas the chimpanzees only gained 26 genes and lost over 700 genes present in humans (BAILEY). Such a difference is significant as humans are not as similar to chimpanzees as believed to be; what works for a chimpanzee will not necessarily be applicable to humans. Even with such genetic differences, there exists substantial differences in the expression of genes which the two species do share. A study analyzed around 10,500 genes in the organs of humans and chimpanzees, with results indicating substantial differential expression in the organs, such as 34% difference in the brain and 35% in the heart (BAILEY). Genetics are the frontrunners in the argument for chimpanzee biomedical research, but the actual truth may be that there is enough difference between the two species that inaccurate results may be …show more content…

Chimpanzees and other animals do have a moral status, thereby causing people to not needlessly abuse them and have support in such cases. However, the question lies in how much moral status they actually have. Most humans believe themselves to be superior or rather be conservative and protective of our own species; believe in ‘speciesism’. As described by Peter Singer, it is “prejudice or bias in favor of the interests of one’s own species… against those of members of [others’]” (BBC). Humans are believed to be more self-aware than other species, and have more autonomous in their purpose in life. This belief is believed to entitle humans as morally superior than other animals, but even then, it is biologically natural to prefer one’s own kind over others, treat them more favorably (BBC). Thereby leading to the argument that animals and even non-human primates cannot be considered as equals to humans, the consequentialist argument that the benefits for humans in biomedical research outweigh the harm done to animals

Open Document