: Animals are not property; they deserve bodily integrity and freedom. Scientific Frameworks for Welfare
The relationship between humans and animals is undergoing a profound global shift. For centuries, animals were viewed primarily through the lens of utility—as food, labor, or tools for human advancement. Today, a growing intersection of science, philosophy, and law is challenging this anthropocentric worldview. : Animals are not property; they deserve bodily
: A science-based approach focusing on the physical and mental state of an animal in relation to its living and dying conditions. Goal : Minimize suffering and provide a "good life." Today, a growing intersection of science, philosophy, and
The most prominent voice for this position is philosopher (author of The Case for Animal Rights ). Regan argued that if humans have rights because they are conscious, sentient beings with a welfare, then logically, any animal that is also a "subject-of-a-life" (which would include most mammals and birds) must also have rights. Regan argued that if humans have rights because
This philosophy rejects the idea that animals are human property. It argues that animals possess inherent value and basic rights, most notably the right to bodily autonomy and life. From this perspective, any institutional use of animals—whether for food, clothing, or experimentation—is fundamentally unjust, regardless of how "humane" the conditions may be. The Science of Animal Sentience
The baseline standard for animal welfare is governed by the globally recognized , originally formulated in 1965 by the UK Brambell Committee: