Animals and Science, Do They Mix?

[Punum]

I recently had a veterinarian in India contact me. He brought up the subject of using animals for the benefit of science. He wanted to get feedback from people around the world. This is a very controversial topic. On one side people are all for it. They have a family member that is very sick, or they are sick themselves. They would like to find a cure before they die. On the other hand there are people who say, why should lots of animals die trying to find a cure for humans? Aren’t animals living, caring, feeling creatures too? There is still another side, why not do the trials on humans? There are people who would not have a problem doing this as long as they were financially cared for and all related expenses were taken care of for them. The challenge, it’s illegal in the US. I’m not sure about other parts of the world.

So what is the answer? Here are a number of responses I have received from around the world. You can read more of these comments, and join a group that I started by clicking here. The group is for people who want to share their thoughts, ideas and stories about animal organizations, charities or issues. We also want to get ideas and feedback on things people can do to help. We are already inundated with the negative things going on in the world. Let’s come up with some solutions that people can implement in their own lives.

This new group is also for people in the film, TV, media industry. I want to find ways to spread the word on some of the wonderful solutions people come up with. The show, Animal Connection, will be a series bringing a lot of these things to the forefront to be shared around the world.

Here are some recent comments:

1. Kim: I am not a Dr. therefore my viewpoint is tilted and objectivity is lost. More and more research is showing us that animals are sentient beings and do feel pain and suffering.

That being said, if one of my children were suffering and there was a cure that required animal testing to determine it’s effect, then obviously my point of view would be altered…therein lies the dilemma.

2. Dr. Mishar: Definitely there are developments on certain area where animal models can be replaced by tissue culture. I think, it’s used wherever it can be. However, we are far from developing a model to replicate human biosystem which is a human being only.

Now the issue is with Animal drug development. We did a historical analysis to get a result that nearly 60% of animal drugs are translated from human pharmaceuticals. Faster the human drug development, faster the translation into veterinary products for animal’s ailments. Drugs like Vancomycin are also available for animals after successful launch for human beings. Animal pharma market is not as attractive as humanpharma to invite heavy investment for new drug development. Mostly animal pharma gets benefited from human focused pharma innovations.

Recently one drug named Carprofen with minimum side effect in human beings got translated for animal’s use also. This drug can actually reduce the side effect of earlier drugs and can reduce animal pain with
minimal side effect.I being a vet and running a clinical research organization for animal’s well being, vouch for faster human drug development which can in turn help animal world.

Now the debate remains and I agree with you Kim and Vanessa, wherever substitute available, it has to be explored first before even thinking about animal trial. Just in case of unavailability of alternatives,
don’t we think that a faster development of human drugs actually helps animals also? Please feel free to give your views and all type of perspectives.

3. Vanessa: You give a very interesting perspective on the matter. I don’t think that the fact that medication for animals can be developed sooner by animal testing should be a justifiable reason to do so.

I will admit that I do not know a lot about this and there are probably a lot of facts unknown to me however here are my thoughts. I ama mother of 7 children and blessed that all are in perfect health.

However, if one of my children had a life threatening illness, I would want anything that could be done to save them to be looked at.Please don’t get me wrong, I am very careful over the name brands I purchase –I make sure they are environmentally friendly and non-animal tested. I have also been a vegetarian for the past 13 years because I would never want another animal to die for me when I can easily substitute the meat. I also have 10 animals at home that I completely love and cherish.

So hypothetically speaking, if there was a lift threatening illness where the only way scientist knew how to create a cure is through animal testing, I can understand the reasoning. However, if you are talking about creating a medication for something more superficial such as medicine to make you look younger or to help someone’s seasonal allergies, then I can not see that as reason enough for it.

4. Rose: I also do not have a medical background, but my line of work does put me in touch with animals in the environment of energy healing and animalcommunication.

I respect the perspectives of everyone here, but have a slightly different one. Animals are sentient beings who feel many of the same emotions we do and feel physical pain. They understand and accept being part of the food chain as natural, however experimentation on animals is not natural, it is something that mankind has developed for personal benefit. I feel that animals have the right to decide if they wish to volunteer for experimentation just as humans do. This is a question of ethics, science has determined that animals think and feel, why should we subject them to terrible quality of life for our benefit? It my belief that we should put more money into finding ways to prevent many of the illnesses that are caused by how we treat our bodies, the earth,
and our food sources rather than into drug research.

I do not have children, but I do have sisters, and a father who died of cancer. I still feel that experimentation on animals is wrong for any reason. Just because you can do something does not mean you should.

5. Carolyn: I understand and respect everyone’s reasoning, this is probably going to be a really interesting conversation!

Personally on both an intellectual and an emotional level I am strongly against the use of animals for testing, especially in the development of cosmetics. This is not only from an animal welfare point of view. I started in on this when I was very, very young. I was pretty rabidly anti-vivisection and testing purely for welfare reasons, and
then went on to research more about the viability and “sense” of animal testing.

So far our conversation has focused on drug development/testing. It is my understanding that using animal tests to model drug effects can give dangerously misleading results. i.e. thalidomide. There are many other ways in which animals are being used for medical research and development.

As far as I remember, nobody has yet talked about other uses of animals in medical/scientific research. As an example- the mouse who had an ear grown on his back.

Where are the boundaries for everyone else here?

If we remove the outright tortures of draize testing, toxicity testing, deliberately poisoning animals or creating tumours etc in animals, what views do all of you have on this issue?

Will an appropriately human based medium for testing and research etc ever be developed when world leaders are religiously and and/or anthrocentrically obsessed to the point of banning stem cell research etc?

P.S Dr Mishrah I somehow had the idea that university students in the UK do sometimes “volunteer” (and sometimes get paid) to participate in drug/chemical trials. Is this correct?