vivisect

简明释义

英[ˈvɪvɪsekt;ˌvɪvɪˈsekt]美[ˌvɪvəˈsekt]

v. 活体解剖（动物）

第 三 人 称 单 数 v i v i s e c t s

现 在 分 词 v i v i s e c t i n g

过 去 式 v i v i s e c t e d

过 去 分 词 v i v i s e c t e d

英英释义

单词用法

同义词

反义词

例句

1.People no longer vivisect animals — it's considered unethical.

人们不再活体解剖动物，因为这被认为是不道德的。

2.People no longer vivisect animals — it's considered unethical.

人们不再活体解剖动物，因为这被认为是不道德的。

3.People no longer vivisect animals.

人们不再活体解剖动物了。

4.The scientist decided to vivisect 活体解剖 the animal to study its brain functions.

这位科学家决定对动物进行vivisect 活体解剖，以研究其脑功能。

5.Many people are opposed to vivisecting 活体解剖 animals for research due to ethical concerns.

由于伦理问题，许多人反对对动物进行vivisecting 活体解剖。

6.In the controversial study, researchers had to vivisect 活体解剖 several subjects to gather data.

在这项有争议的研究中，研究人员不得不对几个对象进行vivisect 活体解剖以收集数据。

7.The documentary highlighted the process of vivisecting 活体解剖 animals in laboratories.

这部纪录片强调了实验室中vivisecting 活体解剖动物的过程。

8.Ethical committees often review proposals involving vivisection 活体解剖 to ensure humane treatment.

伦理委员会通常会审查涉及vivisection 活体解剖的提案，以确保人道对待。

作文

In the realm of scientific research, ethical considerations often clash with the pursuit of knowledge. One term that embodies this conflict is vivisect, which refers to the practice of performing operations on live animals for experimental purposes. This method has been a cornerstone in the development of various medical treatments and surgical techniques, but it raises significant moral questions about the treatment of sentient beings. The word itself is derived from the Latin roots 'vivus,' meaning 'alive,' and 'sectio,' meaning 'cutting.' Therefore, when we discuss vivisect, we are literally talking about cutting into something that is alive, which can evoke strong emotional responses from many people. Historically, vivisect has been used to gain insights into complex biological processes. Pioneering scientists like Claude Bernard were advocates of this method, believing that direct observation of living organisms could lead to breakthroughs in understanding physiology. For example, studying the effects of certain drugs on live subjects allows researchers to observe real-time reactions, which can be crucial for developing effective treatments. However, as our understanding of animal rights and welfare has evolved, so too has the scrutiny of vivisect practices. Critics argue that vivisect is not only ethically questionable but also scientifically flawed. They point out that results obtained from animal testing do not always translate to humans due to biological differences. Furthermore, the stress and pain inflicted on animals during these procedures raise concerns about the validity of the results. As a result, many scientists are now advocating for alternative methods, such as computer modeling or in vitro testing, which do not involve live subjects. This shift reflects a growing awareness of the importance of humane treatment in research. Despite the controversies surrounding vivisect, proponents argue that it remains an essential tool in certain areas of research, particularly in understanding diseases and developing vaccines. The argument hinges on the belief that the potential benefits to human health justify the means. However, this perspective is increasingly challenged by a rising tide of ethical considerations. Organizations dedicated to animal welfare, such as the Humane Society and PETA, have campaigned vigorously against vivisect, advocating for stricter regulations and the adoption of more humane research practices. In conclusion, the debate over vivisect encapsulates a broader discussion about the ethics of scientific research. As society progresses, it is crucial to balance the quest for knowledge with compassion for living beings. While vivisect has contributed to many medical advancements, the future may lie in finding innovative methods that respect animal welfare while still allowing for scientific exploration. Ultimately, the challenge for researchers will be to navigate this complex landscape, ensuring that the pursuit of knowledge does not come at the cost of ethical integrity.

在科学研究领域，伦理考量常常与知识追求相冲突。一个体现这种冲突的术语是vivisect，指的是为实验目的对活体动物进行手术的做法。这种方法在各种医疗治疗和外科技术的发展中一直是基石，但它引发了关于对待有感知生物的重大道德问题。这个词本身源于拉丁语根词“vivus”，意为“活着”，以及“sectio”，意为“切割”。因此，当我们讨论vivisect时，我们实际上是在谈论对活体进行切割，这可能会引起许多人强烈的情感反应。 历史上，vivisect被用来深入了解复杂的生物过程。像克劳德·伯纳德这样的开创性科学家是这种方法的倡导者，他们认为直接观察活的有机体可以带来生理学理解上的突破。例如，研究某些药物对活体的影响使研究人员能够观察实时反应，这对于开发有效的治疗至关重要。然而，随着我们对动物权利和福利的理解不断演变，对vivisect实践的审视也在加深。 批评者认为，vivisect不仅在伦理上值得怀疑，而且在科学上也存在缺陷。他们指出，从动物测试中获得的结果并不总是能转化为人类，因为生物差异。此外，在这些过程中对动物施加的压力和疼痛引发了对结果有效性的担忧。因此，许多科学家现在提倡使用替代方法，例如计算机建模或体外测试，这些方法不涉及活体对象。这一转变反映了对研究中人道待遇重要性的日益关注。 尽管围绕vivisect的争议仍然存在，支持者认为它在某些研究领域仍然是必不可少的工具，特别是在理解疾病和开发疫苗方面。这个论点的基础是相信对人类健康的潜在益处可以证明其手段的合理性。然而，这种观点正受到越来越多伦理考量的挑战。致力于动物福利的组织，如人道协会和PETA，积极反对vivisect，呼吁实施更严格的法规和采用更人道的研究实践。 总之，关于vivisect的辩论概括了关于科学研究伦理的更广泛讨论。随着社会的进步，平衡对知识的追求与对生命的同情至关重要。虽然vivisect对许多医学进步做出了贡献，但未来可能在于寻找尊重动物福利的创新方法，同时仍允许科学探索。最终，研究人员面临的挑战将是驾驭这一复杂的环境，确保知识的追求不会以伦理完整性为代价。