Ethics in scientific research

In the field of scientific research, ethics play a crucial role in shaping how studies are conducted and how living subjects are treated. One of the most significant distinctions lies between research involving humans and research involving animals. These two categories are governed by different ethical responsibilities, primarily because humans possess a higher level of consciousness and can make informed decisions, whereas animals cannot.
When researchers work with human participants, consent is a central element. People are capable of understanding potential risks, whether they involve privacy concerns, emotional discomfort, or moral considerations, and can voluntarily decide whether to participate. Their awareness allows for variations in consent depending on individual circumstances. In contrast, animals lack the ability to process information in this way. Once they are chosen for an experiment, they have no capacity to resist or withdraw. This fundamental difference means that ethical guidelines for human research and animal research are not, and cannot be, identical — even though both areas are regulated.
A well-known example of this contrast can be found in psychology. In Harry Harlow’s experiments with rhesus monkeys, infant monkeys were separated from their biological mothers and placed with surrogate “wire mothers” for extended periods. This caused significant psychological stress and long-term behavioral issues, though the study aimed to examine maternal attachment. By comparison, Mary Ainsworth’s “Strange Situation” experiment involved short-term separations of infants from their mothers. It was conducted under professional supervision and with parental consent, ensuring the children’s well-being. This contrast highlights how human research is strictly controlled to minimize harm and protect participants.
Still, an important ethical question remains: should the level of responsibility toward animal subjects be raised to match, at least in part, the standards applied to humans? All sentient beings can experience pain, which makes this debate more than just theoretical. A striking case illustrating this issue was the controversy surrounding the Draize rabbit eye test. This procedure, used by cosmetic brands including Dior, involved applying chemicals directly into rabbits’ eyes to assess product safety for humans. Public outrage over the suffering inflicted during these tests led to stricter animal welfare regulations in the cosmetics industry.
This development reflects a growing awareness that animals, too, deserve protection from unnecessary harm. While humans and animals differ in their capacity for consent and cognitive awareness, the ethical responsibility to minimize suffering must remain a central principle in research. True scientific progress should never come at the cost of disregarding the welfare of those, human or animal, who make it possible.