In vitro testing is done outside of a living organism on cells, tissues, or organs. Research has suggested that in vitro testing may be more effective than animal testing at providing rapid, precise, and relevant results in certain cases. Computer models have been shown to be as or more effective than animal models in some experimental circumstances. Using human volunteers in the initial stages of research must be done with caution.
There are a number of examples of communities being taken advantage of in medical research. Globalization of human-subject research has led to pharmaceutical companies and academic institutions recruiting volunteers from lower-income countries at an increasing rate.
With this trend comes ethical concerns about whether the tested drugs and procedures will actually benefit the communities on which they are being tested, or if the researchers are taking advantage of these communities. Human tissue can be donated via procedures such as biopsies, transplants, and cosmetic surgery for use in labs. Tissue can also be collected post-mortem for use in clinical trials.
One of the best ways to stop animal testing for cosmetic purposes is to purchase cruelty-free products. These products have not been tested on animals and thus do not contribute to animal suffering in labs.
A bill recently introduced to Congress HR Human Research and Testing Act of could be the first step in effectively reducing the number of animals suffering because of animal testing in the United States. Showing support for the bill by contacting legislators could help this bill succeed. Animals have suffered for the sake of human invention for long enough. It is time that the scientific community began the process of phasing out animal testing.
Using animals as subjects has proven repeatedly to be ineffective and financially wasteful. Every animal deserves better than a life spent in a lab suffering from a human-inflicted illness.
Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science; — Neuroprotective agents for clinical trials in ALS: A systematic assessment. Neurology ; 67 —7 [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]. Sinha G. Another blow for ALS. Nature Biotechnology ; 31 [ Google Scholar ]. See also note 30, Traynor et al. Experimental models of traumatic brain injury: Do we really need a better mousetrap? Neuroscience ; —89 [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]. Animal models of traumatic brain injury.
And see commentary by Farber: Farber N. Drug development in brain injury. Clinical trials in traumatic brain injury: Past experience and current developments. Neurotherapeutics ; 7 — Genomic responses in mouse models poorly mimic human inflammatory diseases. The importance of using human-based models in gene and drug discovery.
Drug Discovery World Fall—40 [ Google Scholar ]. Harding A. More compounds failing phase I. Animal models of stroke: Are they relevant to human disease?
Stroke ; 21 :1—3. Minimum information about animal experiments: Supplier is also important. Journal of Neuroscience Research ; 87 —7. Heritability of nociception I: Responses of 11 inbred mouse strains on 12 measures of nociception. Pain ; 80 — Translational potential of preclinical trials of neuroprotection through pharmacotherapy for spinal cord injury. Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine ; 17 — Tissue-specific transcriptional regulation has diverged significantly between human and mouse.
Horrobin DF. Modern biomedical research: An internally self-consistent universe with little contact with medical reality? Nature Reviews Drug Discovery ; 2 —4. A role for the CHC22 clathrin heavy-chain isoform in human glucose metabolism. Science ; —6. Psoriasis: Evolution of pathogenic concepts and new therapies through phases of translational research. See also The mouse model: Less than perfect, still invaluable.
See note 2, Benatar See note 29, Perrin and Wilkins et al. Animal models of Alzheimer disease: Historical pitfalls and a path forward.
ServiceNote: Human tissue research for drug discovery. Lane E, Dunnett S. Psychopharmacology ; — Bailey J. An assessment of the role of chimpanzees in AIDS vaccine research. Tonks A. The quest for the AIDs vaccine.
An HIV vaccine—evolving concepts. New England Journal of Medicine ; — Lemere CA. Progress in Brain Research ; Allen A. Of mice and men: The problems with animal testing. Attarwala H. TGN From discovery to disaster. See Hogan RJ. Are nonhuman primates good models for SARS? See also Bailey J.
Non-human primates in medical research and drug development: A critical review. Biogenic Amines ; 19 — Lemon R, Dunnett SB. Surveying the literature from animal experiments: Critical reviews may be helpful—not systematic ones. BMJ ; —8. Does animal experimentation inform human health care? Observations from a systematic review of international animal experiments on fluid resuscitation.
See note 60,Allen See also Heywood R. Target organ toxicity. See Fletcher AP. Drug safety tests and subsequent clinical experience. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine ; 71 —6. See note 60, Allen See note 5, Pippin See also Greek R, Greek J. Animal research and human disease. See also note 5, Leist, Hartung Food and Drug Administration. Drug discovery pipeline. Follow the yellow brick road. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery ;, at For data on aspirin, see Hartung T.
See also note 5, Pippin Species differences and the clinical trial of new drugs: A review. In November the European Union put forward proposals to revise the directive for the protection of animals used in scientific experiments in line with the three R principle of replacing, reducing and refining the use of animals in experiments.
The proposals have three aims:. The proposed directive covers all live non-human vertebrate animals intended for experiments plus certain other species likely to experience pain, and also animals specifically bred so that their organs or tissue can be used in scientific procedures. The proposal also introduces a ban on the use of great apes - chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas and orangutans - in scientific procedures, other than in exceptional circumstances, but there is no proposal to phase out the use of other non-human primates in the immediate foreseeable future.
Search term:. Read more. This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets CSS enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets CSS if you are able to do so. This page has been archived and is no longer updated. Find out more about page archiving.
Ethics guide. Experimenting on animals. On this page Animal experimentation Drug safety Are animal experiments useful? Animal experimentation A difficult issue In Dr Jay Vacanti and his team grew an ear on the back of a mouse Animal experiments are widely used to develop new medicines and to test the safety of other products.
Two positions on animal experiments In favour of animal experiments: Experimenting on animals is acceptable if and only if : suffering is minimised in all experiments human benefits are gained which could not be obtained by using other methods Against animal experiments: Experimenting on animals is always unacceptable because: it causes suffering to animals the benefits to human beings are not proven any benefits to human beings that animal testing does provide could be produced in other ways Harm versus benefit The case for animal experiments is that they will produce such great benefits for humanity that it is morally acceptable to harm a few animals.
The three Rs The three Rs are a set of principles that scientists are encouraged to follow in order to reduce the impact of research on animals. The three Rs are: Reduction, Refinement, Replacement.
Reduction : Reducing the number of animals used in experiments by: Improving experimental techniques Improving techniques of data analysis Sharing information with other researchers Refinement : Refining the experiment or the way the animals are cared for so as to reduce their suffering by: Using less invasive techniques Better medical care Better living conditions Replacement : Replacing experiments on animals with alternative techniques such as: Experimenting on cell cultures instead of whole animals Using computer models Studying human volunteers Using epidemiological studies Top.
Drug safety Animal experiments and drug safety Scientists say that banning animal experiments would mean either an end to testing new drugs or using human beings for all safety tests Animal experiments are not used to show that drugs are safe and effective in human beings - they cannot do that. Are animal experiments useful? Not all scientists are convinced that these tests are valid and useful.
Jane Goodall 'Reason for Hope', John P. Yet, such experiments belittle the complexity of human conditions which are affected by wide-ranging variables such as genetics, socio-economic factors, deeply-rooted psychological issues and different personal experiences.
The support for animal testing is based largely on anecdote and is not backed up, we believe, by the scientific evidence that is out there. The science relating to animal experiments can be extremely complicated and views often differ.
0コメント