|
Why can't alternatives such as computer
models and cell cultures replace animal research?
Computer models and cell cultures, as well as other adjunct research
methods, are excellent avenues for reducing the number of animals used.
These methods are used to screen and determine the toxic potential of
a substance in the early stages of investigation, thereby reducing the
total number of research animals needed. The final test, however, has
to be done in a whole, living system. Even the most sophisticated technology
cannot mimic the complicated interactions among cells, tissues and organs
that occur in humans and animals. Scientists must understand these interactions
before introducing a new treatment or substance into humans.
In addition, there are very strong economic incentives to replace
animals with computers or other adjunct methods. Research animals are
very expensive to acquire and care for and are only used because no alternatives
currently exist.
For the near future, however, these adjunct technologies will
be used in conjunction with, not instead of, laboratory animals.
How can research results derived from animal
testing be extrapolated to humans?
There are striking similarities between the physiological systems
of humans and various species of animals. For example, much of what we
know about the immune system has come from studies with mice, and much
of what we know about the cardiovascular system has come from studies
with dogs.
Research results from animals also provide the information necessary
to design human trials that must be completed for legal approval of new
devices, drugs or procedures. It is important to be able to gauge how
a new drug or procedure will affect a whole biological system before
using it on humans. This is critical for scientific as well as ethical
reasons. Laboratory animals are an integral part of the research process.
In fact, virtually every major medical advance of the last century is
due, in part, to research with animals.
What assurances exist that stolen or lost
pets are not used in research?
While some research requires that dogs and cats are used, the
vast majority of laboratory animals are rodents specifically bred for
research. Nearly half of the dogs and cats needed for research are also
bred for that purpose. Since state laws and local policies prevent many
animal pounds and shelters from providing dogs and cats to research facilities,
animal dealers are the primary source for the other half of the animals
scientists require. These dealers must be licensed by the United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA) and must adhere to Animal Welfare Act
standards of care. Both dealers and research facilities can obtain dogs
and cats only from specified sources and must comply with detailed record-keeping
and waiting-period requirements. In addition, USDA conducts unannounced
inspections of dealers and research facilities for compliance to help
ensure research animals are not missing pets.
Why is it important to conduct product
safety tests on animals when "cruelty-free" products are available?
It is important to remember the circumstances that led to safety
testing of all new consumer ingredients and products, particularly cosmetics.
As recently as several decades ago, consumers were subjected to products
that were not adequately tested prior to use, resulting in reports of
permanent harm, including blindness.
Product safety testing ensures that products are safe when used
as directed and provides scientific data for poison control centers and
emergency room physicians in the event a product is misused. Adequate
testing of products is both a moral and legal obligation to the public.
The use of animals in product safety testing provides a whole, living
system that can reflect how certain substances will react in or on the
body.
The term "cruelty-free" is often misused and misunderstood. Companies
that claim they conduct no animal testing either contract testing to
an outside laboratory or use compounds known to be safe through previous
animal testing.
Aren't the animals in laboratories suffering
and in pain?
The use of animals in research and testing is strictly controlled,
particularly regarding potential pain. Federal laws, the Animal Welfare
Act and the Public Health Service Act, regulate the alleviation and elimination
of pain, as well as such aspects of animal care as caging, feeding, exercise
of dogs and the psychological well-being of primates. Further, each institution
must establish an animal care and use committee that includes an outside
member of the public as well as a veterinarian. This committee oversees,
inspects and monitors every potential experiment to help ensure optimal
animal care.
The scientific community advocates the highest quality of animal
care and treatment for two key reasons. First, the use of animals in
research is a privilege, and those animals that are helping us unlock
the mysteries of disease deserve our respect and the best possible care.
Second, a well-treated animal will provide more reliable scientific results,
which is the goal of all researchers.
What happens to animals once an experiment
is completed?
The majority of animals under study must be euthanized in order
to obtain tissue for pathological evaluation and for use in vitro tests.
Euthanasia is the act of inducing a humane death. The American Veterinary
Medical Association publishes euthanasia methods considered acceptable.
Those animals involved in experiments that do not require tissue
for pathological evaluation may take part in additional experiments.
However, except in rare circumstances, federal regulations do not allow
an animal to be used in more than one major surgical procedure.
Why are increasing numbers of animals used
in research?
The number of animals used in research has actually decreased
in the past 20-25 years. Best estimates for the reduction in the overall
use of animals in research range from 20% - 50%. This reduction is more
consistent and striking when comparing species. For example, best government
estimates report that the number of cats used in research has dropped
66% since 1967. Due to a variety of factors, including the increase in
nonanimal adjunct testing and the refinement of laboratory animal medicine,
there are fewer animals used for many research projects.
Do we really have the right to experiment
on animals? What about their rights?
The use of animals in research is a privilege that must be carefully
guarded to assure human and animal relief from the specter of disease
and suffering. To ignore human and animal suffering is irresponsible
and unethical. Nearly every major medical advance of the 20th century
has depended largely on research with animals. Our best hope for developing
preventions, treatments and cures for diseases such as Alzheimer's, AIDS,
and cancer will also involve biomedical research using animals.
In fact, research on animals is in many cases an obligation. According
to the Nuremburg Code, drawn up after World War II as a result of Nazi
atrocities, any experiments on humans "should be designed and based on
the results of animal experimentation." The Nazis had outlawed animal
experimentation but allowed experiments on Jews and asocial persons." The
Declaration of Helsinki, adopted in 1964 by the 18th World Medical Assembly
and revised in 1975, also states that medical research on human subjects "should
be based on adequately performed laboratory and animal experimentation."
It is crucial to distinguish between animal rights and animal
welfare. The scientific community supports animal welfare, which means
guaranteeing the health and well-being of these animals.
Where can I learn more about animal research?
The Foundation for Biomedical Research has an extensive selection
of Educational Resources on
our Website. If you have a question that is not answered on our Website,
please contact us and
we'll do our best to answer your question fairly and factually. |
