Summary of what the article is about:
"Using animals as research subjects in medical investigations is widely condemned on two grounds: first, because it wrongly violates the rights of animals, and second, because it wrongly imposes on sentient creatures much avoidable suffering."
Position of the author:
"The first relies on a mistaken understanding of rights; the second relies on a mistaken calculation of the consequences. Both deserve definitive dismissal"
- Why animals have no rights
- In defense of "Speciesism"
- Authors concluding remarks (substitution, reduction, consistency)
State my opinion Which consists mostly of dismissing the authors (In defense of "Speciesism") and disagreeing with his remark about there not being a need to reduce the amount of animals in experiments.