Historically, treatment for pain relief has varied according to the social status of the sufferer. A similar tendency to make arbitrary distinctions affecting pain relief was found in an ethnographic study of animal research laboratories. The administration of pain-relieving drugs for animals in laboratories differed from standard practice for humans and, perhaps, for companion animals. Although anesthesia was used routinely for surgical procedures, its administration was sometimes haphazard. Analgesics, however, were rarely used. Most researchers had never thought about using analgesics (...) and did not consider the subject worthy of serious attention. Scientists interviewed for this study agreed readily that animals are capable offeeling pain, but such assertions were muted by an overriding view of lab animals as creatures existing solely for the purposes of research. As a result, it was the exceptional scientist who was able to focus on anything about the animal's subjective experience that might lie outside the boundaries of the research protocol. (shrink)

This article offers a historical perspective on the bearing of the Christian tradition on humans’ ethical relations with other animals. Instead of focusing on major theologians and canonical texts, this article turns to the initiatives taken by laity and clergy in the mobilization of their antivivisection cause in the last quarter of the 19th century. It reveals that despite the lack of institutional support from major Churches, many reformers sympathetic to Christian ideals relied on Christianity as their moral foundation, utilizing (...) various recourses associated with it in their fight against animal experimentation. These reformers appropriated the concepts of sin and self-sacrifice and the notion of the incarnate Christ, as well as critiques against scientific knowledge and materialism permeating the wider conflict between religion and science at the time. In this wideranging mobilization of resources associated with the Christian religious tradition, they sustained a generation of activism against animal experimentation while, at the same time, recreating a positive Christian subtradition in animal ethics. (shrink)