Representações Sociais de pesquisadores sobre o uso de animais como biomodelo em pesquisas científicas

Abstract

The first records of vivisectionist practices date back to 450 BC. Currently, 192.1 million animals die per year in the world, which means 365 animals per minute for scientific purposes. Why are animals still used as biomodels in scientific experiments? This research sought to answer this question that presents itself as a current dilemma both in the scientific community and among the population, creating a space for broad debate in these areas. Along the way in search of an answer, the Theory of Social Representations presented itself, therefore the proposal of this research was to look at animal experimentation from a psychosocial perspective with the aim of understanding the social representations of researchers regarding the use of animals in research. The Theory of Social Representations is an extremely useful analytical resource for investigating common sense. With the multi-methodological contribution of this theory, it was possible to uncover certain logics that underlie researchers' representations regarding the use of animals. To this end, 16 researchers were interviewed, the free conversational interviews revolved around a theme and followed a semi-structured script. Participants were selected based on a single fundamental criterion: direct experience in research that uses animals as biomodels. In this work it was possible to verify how and why the knowledge shared by scientists in relation to the use of animals in scientific research constitutes a common reality, and even in the reified universe they become part of the group's daily life. At this point the dialogue between knowledge becomes evident, one exerting force on the other, ideas put into practice, directing the progress of science. The results seem to point to a representation centered on the anthropocentric and speciesist paradigm. The image of the “objectified” animal constructed in common sense authorizes the use of animals in scientific experimentation. In both universes, the animal is an object, therefore usable. A point worth highlighting is the issue of otherness that stood out in this work. The instabilities of the relationship with otherness revealed conflicts and dissonances arising from the activity carried out in procedures with animals. The conclusion is the importance of taking this debate to researchers and stimulating the critical thinking necessary for scientific progress.