This week’s topic challenged me to think critically about animal rights, alcohol and drug consumption, and the
origin of pain. I have posted my DB posts on this document I thought gave a proper summary of my views.
Additionally, will comment on each topic.
Animal Research
The use of animals for research has been a long dilemma in the 20 century; as a result, U.S. legislative and
th
regulatory proclamations have been endorsed. These include the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory
Animals Guide (the ), the Laboratory Animal Welfare Act (now the Animal Welfare Act; AWA), the Health Research
Extension Act of 1985 under the Public Health Service, and the NIH’s Public Health Service Policy on the Humane
Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. Additionally, the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) was
established under recommendation from the and AWA was endorsed in many institutions across the nation. Guide
The IACUC partners with attending veterinarians, occupational health and safety personnel, and investigators, all
working collaboratively to ensure animal welfare and safe working conditions for researchers and animals.
To this date, there is a troubling side of anti-animal research activism concerning regularity that has taken the
world by storm, embracing violence as a tactic to discourage the use of animals in research (Macrina. 2014)
6.1 Although these animals are not necessarily being used for research, they are still a segment of an institutional
laboratory and a protocol should be submitted to IACUC to cover the activities. According to Macrina (2014),
“along with a detailed explanation of the experimental procedures to be performed on the animals, the use of
appropriate anesthetics, analgesics, or sedatives should be described. Description of the drugs used for these
purposes, as well as the dosages and frequency of administration, should be detailed enough that the committee can
determine that they are appropriate for the species and experimental procedures involved.” Additionally, a mention
of the contracted laboratory that would be screening for specific pathogens should be submitted to IACUC as well
with the laboratory’s methods for screenings. A pivotal goal in animal research is to minimize pain and distress in
animals (Macrina, 2014).
6.2 I think Dr. Spiegel should’ve taken all complaints on animal care seriously, no matter how “petty” they sounded,
especially if the complaints were submitted by principal investigators. If the complaints were resolved adequately,
there wouldn’t have been any evidence for Janie to “uncover.” Furthermore, Dr. Spiegel should speak privately with
Janie, with the medical school’s legal counsel present. Dr. Spiegel should address Janie’s alliance with the
international animal rights organization in addition to her frequent discussions with investigators that had interfered
with her assigned duties as an animal caretaker. In my opinion, if Janie’s goal was to expose animal mistreatment in
medical research, she failed because she, herself, didn’t partake in her assigned duties as an animal caretaker. Lastly,
Dr. Spiegel should aim to resolve all of the complaints that were mentioned to him, even if that involves contacting
IACUC for further investigation.
6.4 Macrina (2014) states, “any steps that were taken to make the proposed experiments less invasive, or to make
use of a species lower on the phylogenetic tree, should be explained for the committee.” Similarly, “along with a
detailed explanation of the experimental procedures to be performed on the animals, the use of appropriate
anesthetics, analgesics, or sedatives should be described. Description of the drugs used for these purposes, as well as
the dosages and frequency of administration, should be detailed enough that the committee can determine that they
are appropriate for the species and experimental procedures involved. An assessment of pain and distress anticipated
can be useful for the committee. (Procedures that are painful in humans must be considered to be painful in animals
unless evidence to the contrary is supplied.) The investigator must also describe the criteria and process that will be
used to remove animals from a study or euthanize them, if painful or stressful outcomes may be anticipated. Post-
procedure care of the animals should be described, as well as the method of euthanasia or ultimate disposition.” In
this case, I think Jiao should speak to a member of IACUC concerning the attitude and negligence of animal care her
mentor is displaying. Yes, their mentor-trainee relationship will be destroyed, however, Jiao is preventing more
intentional harm to the animals in their laboratory. I also agree with Bryan that Jiao is protecting her profession, the
future of her career, and the research industry. Mark’s reference to Proverbs 12:10, “a righteous man regards the life
of his animal, but the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel,” speaks volumes to what we all should abide by.
6.7 I think the issue would be resolved if Dr. Schwartz contacted Dr. Tanaka and they sorted out the situation
together. Dr. Tanaka could return early from the overseas research institute and they could proceed according to Dr.
Tanaka’s protocol especially if Dr. Schwartz is consistently monitoring the two mice. Additionally, for times like
these, technological advances are necessary; Dr. Schwartz can video-chat Dr. Tanaka. Dr. Schwartz shouldn’t
jeopardize her reputation as a scientist or colleague because of uncertainty on what to do in this situation; there are
options available. With the approval by Dr. Tanaka, Dr, Schwartz should contact IACUC and the on-call veterinarian
and mention her idea of anesthetizing the two dying rats with isoflurane using the apparatus from her lab. I don’t
think the veterinarian would shut down the experiment if a similar procedure to Dr. Tanaka’s is conducted, although,
Dr. Schwartz should try her best to comply with Dr. Tanaka’s protocol. Although Dr. Schwartz is not an investigator
for Dr. Tanaka’s project, she is highly trained in the field of neurodegenerative disease and is working with rodent
models in her lab as well.
I hope Dr. Schwartz takes my counsel. Proverbs 27:9 (English Standard Version) states, “oil and perfume make the
heart glad, and the sweetness of a friend comes from his earnest counsel.”
6.9 (Replying to Zach) Dr. Featherstone’s solution is not ethical, although the commercial laboratory is legal. The
issue with using the mouse ascites method of monoclonal antibodies was not Dr. Featherstone’s ability to produce
them, but the methods utilized to retrieve the antibodies. In turn, the commercial source for monoclonal antibodies
was an appropriate alternative to using murine models for monoclonal antibody production. I took the liberty in
searching what the ascites production process is. Mice are primed before hybridoma cells are injected into their
peritoneal cavity. The number of cells that are injected ranges from hundreds of thousands to millions. The new
“ascites” is incubated in the mice for one to two weeks before taken out. After the ascites fluid is extracted from the
mouse, it is spun down in a centrifuge, Custom contract lab that she has engaged to produce the antibody using her
cell lines and to her specifications. According to Washington State University (2017), the production of monoclonal
antibodies in murine animals has the potential to produce pain, distress, or discomfort in the animals utilized.
Moreover, Dr. Louis does have the obligation to report this information to the IACUC as a member of the IACUC
itself. Dr. Featherstone did not mention the commercial source was a custom lab that is using her cell lines and
according to her specifications. Dr. Featherstone should’ve stated in the previous proposal to the IACUC her
recommendations to the commercial laboratory. I do agree with you here, Zach, that the IACUC should’ve done
more than simply approve the proposal and should’ve taken the extra step in making suggestions for the revision. I
would exhort Psalm 34:13(New International Version) to Dr. Featherstone; it states, “keep your tongue from evil and
your lips from telling lies.”
6.10 I would personally call the lab director for his opinion especially since Tom is particularly concerned only with
his dissertation and not the welfare of the animals. It would be of my best interest to read the protocol for this type
of situation. Additionally, it would be beneficial to stop the experimentation because it allows for the determination
of the rats’ death or paralysis, further promoting accurate future experimentation. Afterward, I would inform the
IACUC although it does against Tom’s favor. Also, if Tom is suggesting that paralysis and death are due to my
inadequate experience, then he should, even more, want to be involved and teach me the correct way of installing
the catheter. Romans 13 states that we must “respect our authorities.” Although it may go against our wants, it
should always be on our minds.
Commentary
All my answers to the case studies solely reference the Macrina (2014). However, it is important to address
animal rights from a religious perspective as written by Geisler (2010a). There are three major views: materialistic,
pantheistic, and theistic. The materialistic view of animal rights assumes that humankind differs only in degree and
not in kind from animals. Therefore, a difference in degree can eventually become a difference in kind and apparent
differences in kind are always reducible to differences in degree. Additionally, according to this view, humans, and
animals can both solve problems, animals associate socially as humans do, neurotic insanity is found in both humans
and animals, and humans differ only in degree from animals because there is no such thing as a rational
soul. Geisler further evaluates an argument against the materialistic view: a difference in kind revolts against
evolution, human differences from animals are not merely superficial, human rationality (discursive reasoning) did
not develop evolutionarily, animal sociality (instinct) is different from human sociality (convention), and neurotic
insanity in animals is conditioned while humans can go insane without the aid of a psychologist.
Pantheists view nature is a living organism, all living species are manifestations of God, humans are one with
nature, and Christianity was originally pantheistic. A sort of mantra for pantheists is that reverence toward all created
beings is because God is all, and all is God, and as such, do not see the distinction between a divine being and
created being. Geisler evaluates the pantheistic views and determines that nature as a whole is not a living organism
although it may contain “a multiplicity of living creatures,” it does contain nonliving matter. Similarly, nature isn’t
divine: a divine being is “eternal, immutable, infinite, and absolute,” but nature is none of these. Moreover, Geisler
explains that living species are not manifestations of God, following pantheistic views: because the whole of nature
is not divine, humankind and animals are particulars within the whole of nature and are thus not divine. Also,
humans are not one with nature; in fact, humans can live in harmony with all creatures without being identical to
nature. The bible states that only humans were created in the image of God and have immortal souls, whereas
animals have mortal souls. Finally, Geisler argues Christianity as a God-centered religion.
To conclude, Geisler describes the Evangelical Christian arguments on the treatment on animals, according to
the Bible: only humankind was made in the image of God (Genesis 1:26-27), humankind was made with a living
soul (Job 33:4), humans possess unique characteristics, humans have a unique place in creation, God’s order for
creation is hierarchically arranged, taming and farming of animals is not forbidden, and the eating of animals is not
forbidden. Besides, all creation has a God-given value and humankind should care for God’s creation (Genesis 1:28;
2:15; Leviticus 25:7; Numbers 22:27-32; Deuteronomy 25:4; Proverbs 12:10); all beings have glory and partake in
divine glory although creation is not equally valuable (Matthew 10:31); God’s original intention with creation was
for order and harmony but the fall did not negate God’s purpose for animals; Christ has redeemed all creation and
there will be mutual peace and order between God, humans, and animals (Revelation 21; Romans 8:18-23); and in
his parables, Christ speaks to the value of animals (Matthew 6:26)
Alcohol and Drug Consumptions
Social drinking is different and similar to drinking coffee.
Differences: for one, caffeinated coffee, is a stimulant and most alcohols are depressants. Secondly, small
amounts of alcohol can have dire effects on one’s body. One-third of the world’s population consumes ethanol
(alcohol) regularly. (Heier, Xie, & Zimmermann, 2016; Marik & Liggett, 2019) This growing pandemic has driven
doctors and researchers to study the metabolism, regulation, and diseases associated with alcohol use. Patients with
alcohol use disorders (AUDs) due to chronic alcohol consumption are frequently hospitalized for alcohol-related
medical conditions such as hypoglycemia, diabetic ketoacidosis, vitamin deficiencies, hepatic steatosis, and
acetaldehyde toxicity. Alcohol use while pregnant can lead to miscarriages, fetal alcohol syndrome, and other
developmental delays. Although many advocates for drinking use the story of Jesus turning water into wine: yes, he
did do that, but he did NOT turn water into tequila, bourbon, or any other extremely alcoholic beverage. Even then,
Proverbs 23:29-35 (English Standard Version) declares, “Who has woe? Who has sorrow? Who has strife? Who has
complaining? Who has wounds without cause? Who has redness of eyes? Those who tarry long over wine; those
who go to try mixed wine. Do not look at wine when it is red when it sparkles in the cup and goes down smoothly.
In the end, it bites like a serpent and stings like an adder. Your eyes will see strange things, and your heart utters
perverse things…” Additionally, the Bible exhorts us to be free of drunkenness (Proverbs 3:4-5; Ephesian 5:18;
Galatians 5:21; 1 Corinthians 6:10, English Standard Version).
Similarities: excessive coffee and alcohol intake can lead to death. Caffeinated coffee does have an addictive
streak and can cause heart palpitations, nervousness, difficulty sleeping, headaches, irritability, fertility problems,
and miscarriages if taken in high amounts (over 4 cups a day) and repetitively. Moreover, both coffee and alcohol
intake in small doses is beneficial for one’s health. The former is associated with better short-term memory and
lowering the chances of developing Parkinson’s, Type 2 Diabetes, and Colon Cancer. The latter (particularly wine) is
associated with lower chances of ischemic stroke and Alzheimer’s disease.
The Bible exhorts us to be “sober-minded” (1 Peter 5:8, English Standard Version); an addiction to coffee and
alcohol is going against this verse. I don’t drink because it’s such a controversial topic for Christians that I don’t
want someone to ever say to me, “aren’t you a Christian and you drink?” Also, in 1 Corinthians, Paul exhorts us not
to do anything that would cause our brother or sister to stumble. Plus, as I stated above, alcohol consumption does
have physical consequences.
I understand that many people refer to Jesus when he converted water into wine; but it was just wine, not tequila,
bourbon, or any other hard drink. Wine does have some medicinal effects, but wine was made differently in the
times of Jesus than it is now because of the extensive fermentation process. Geisler (2010b) states, “the alcoholic
drink commended for moderate consumption in the Bible was not strong drink but a diluted form that would not
cause intoxication in normal usage.” Studies of ancient customs reveal that biblical wine was fermented, but it was
diluted 3 to 1 with water when used as a beverage or in connection with the Passover or Communion. It would take
over 20 glasses of New Testament wine to get drunk!
Additionally, there are both similarities and differences between using valium, tobacco, and marijuana. The
substances are different in that valium is solely a prescriptive drug; both tobacco and marijuana are not prescriptive
drugs (although marijuana can be used medicinally). On the other hand, valium and marijuana both aid in anxiety
and muscle movement disorders. Tobacco, in my opinion, has no benefits for the user. All three drugs can lead to
dire effects if taken at high doses and frequencies. 1 Corinthians 6:12 (Amplified Bible) states, “everything is
permissible for me, but not all things are beneficial everything is permissible for me, but I will not be enslaved by
anything [and brought under its power, allowing it to control me].” I don’t ever want to be brought under the power
of an addictive and/or deleterious drug. I think a holistic approach should be implemented first before any
medication is prescribed.
Commentary
It is unbiblical to take intoxicating drinks. The Hebrew words for strong drink refer to intoxicating drinks made
from barley, pomegranates, dates, apples, or honey, fermented grape juice, or freshly pressed juice is used 23 times,
140 times, and 38 times in the Old Testament (Geisler, 2010b). The bible references twenty reasons for abstaining
from intoxicants including the slowing of the thinking process (Proverbs 31:4-5), it leads to poverty (Proverbs
21:17), it leads to brokenness (Jeremiah 23:9), and it results in guilt (Isaiah 24:20).
Furthermore, it is deadly to take intoxicating drinks/addicting drugs. Alcohol causes more deaths than any other
drug (~200,000 per year), it is responsible for 70% of drowning and choking, it is involved in 50% of all “freak
accidents,” it causes ~27,000 deaths a year by liver diseases, ~30% of all suicides are alcohol-related, 20% of all
airplane crashes are alcohol-related, 50% of all murderers are drunk when they kill, 50% of all fire deaths are
alcohol-related, it is a major contributing cause in 1/3 of all traffic deaths.
It is dangerous to take intoxicating drinks: alcohol contributes to more deaths than any other drug, it leads to drug
addiction (~5% of the population), it is involved in both spouse and child abuse, it contributes to mental and
physical diseases, ~45% of the homeless are alcoholics, and it contributes to 500,000 injuries per year. Also, it is
addictive to take intoxicating drinks. ~77% of high schoolers use alcohol and 44% of eighth-graders drink. Alcohol
drinking is also unhealthy and causes liver diseases, contributes to heart attacks, increases the change of cancer 3x-
6x times, it is the number three cause of birth defects, and it can cause impotence and sterility. Finally, it is
unnecessarily costly to take intoxicating drinks.
Origin of Pain
Commentary
Pain originated after the fall of man in Genesis 3. Because of our sin, we live in a fallen world with fallen people.
However, I do think God can use pain as a model for action; but not all pain is God sent. I think there are several
reasons why pain occurs: (1) we mess up and fill into sin (e.x., David and Bathsheba, 2 Samuel 11), (2) other people
mess up and fall into sin (e.x., generational curses; alcoholic family member), (3) Satanic forces (e.x., Ouija Board;
Horoscopes). As a result, there are consequences/pains: David and Bathsheba lost their child (2 Samuel 12:15-19),
watching pornography runs in the family, DUIs, or demonic oppression (Ephesians 6:12). However, I do think that
God can use pain to glorify himself. Think about the story of Lazarus (John 11): in Mary and Martha's perspective,
the loss of their sibling is horrifying. However, in John 11:4 (Amplified Bible), Jesus declares, " ...this sickness will
not end in death; but [on the contrary] for the glory and honor of God, so that the Son of Man may be glorified by
it." This can also be seen in the life of Job, Moses, and Jesus.
Sometimes pain can lead us to our God-given purpose: Does it hurt? yes. Will we have to change as a result? yes. Is
it worth it? yes.
What if the pain associated with a car accident or DUI is what removes you from alcoholism?
What if losing a child is what drives you into God's arms? After David lost his child, 2 Samuel 12 states that he went
into the Lord's house to worship.
Without pain, we wouldn't know what love was.
Furthermore, Anna made a great comment concerning Moralistic Therapeutic Deism. This deism proclaims that
God exists as creator and orders the world and watches over life; God wants people to be good, nice, and fair to each
other, as taught in the Bible and by other religions; the central goal of life is to be happy and feel good about oneself;
God is not involved in our lives except when I need God to solve a problem, and good people go to heaven when
they die. She also mentioned that in her Christian Fellowship group, many women would come for a season and then
leave when their leaders left. The situation that occurred in your Christian fellowship happens so often. Last year, I
started reading this book at a young women's group called Lies Young Women Believe. One of the biggest lies was,
"my youth pastor is my connection to God." In a materialistic and visual world, it is difficult to grasp that our youth
(or senior) pastors and leaders are important spiritual leaders in our lives, but we have access to God through Christ
and Christ alone. 1 Timothy 2:5-6 (New International Version) states, "there is one mediator between God and men,
the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all." I completely understand the carnal impulse to follow
men, when I was in my early teens, I felt the same way about my pastors. However, they left a great foundation for
me spiritually and I was able to understand that my relationship with God through Jesus is what saved me and
pastors/leaders are important for spiritual guidance and growth.
References
Fabich, A. (2015). . United States of America: Liberty University.Origin of pain
Geisler, N. (2010a). Animal Rights. In (2nd ed., pp. 335–358). Christian ethics: Contemporary issues & options
Baker Academic.
Geisler, N. (2010b). Drugs. In (2nd ed., pp. 359–373). Baker Christian ethics: Contemporary issues & options
Academic.
Heier, C., Xie, H., & Zimmermann, R. (2016). Nonoxidative ethanol metabolism in humans—from biomarkers to
bioactive lipids. , (12), 916–923. https://doi.org/10.1002/iub.1569IUBMB Life 68
Macrina, F. (2014). Use of humans in biomedical research. In Scientific integrity: Text and cases in responsible
conduct of research (4th ed., pp. 135–140).
Marik, P. E., & Liggett, A. (2019). Adding an orange to the banana bag: Vitamin C deficiency is common in alcohol
use disorders. Critical Care, 23(1), 4–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-019-2435-4
Prosci Incorporated. (n.d.). Ascites production process. Retrieved from Prosci Incorporated
website: https://www.prosci-inc.com/resources/antibody-development-guide/ascites-production-process/
Washington State University Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee. (2019). The use of mouse ascites in the
production of monoclonal antibodies. Retrieved from Washington State University website:
https://iacuc.wsu.edu/documents/2016/06/policy_23.pdf/
