Despite the development of life-saving procedures as a result of animal testing (for example, pig insulin-secreting cells in diabetics) and the life-threatening consequences of human guinea pigs for drug trials, as experienced by some volunteers in London, UK in 2006, animal welfare/rights activists still advocate for doing away entirely with animal testing. But with all the human will in the world, would this be possible?
Dispensability
The benefits of animal testing to humans aside, it was suggested that banning all animal testing would not benefit the animals, as they (the animals) can not do the research relating to a remedy of their afflictions. Hence, animal testing does benefit animals too, as exemplified in the case of heartworms found in cats and dogs. Heartworms are usually transmitted by mosquitoes, and if untreated, they can be fatal to dogs and cats.
However, health problems in humans from dog Heartworms exist, though the worms are difficult to diagnose clinically in humans, and (therefore) rarely reported. Heartworms in humans could lead to a scarring on the lungs. If the procedure developed by humans on the cats and dogs to eradicate Heartworms in the cats and dogs equally work in humans, it would be unethical and a denial of the right to a good quality life to humans who, in the first instance, were not the primary target of the research.
Such overlap of interests between the humans and lesser animals makes the dispensability of Animal Testing in its entirety, as often demanded by activists, a tall order.
The 3 Rs of Animal Testing
In recognition of the fact that it is ethical that due regard is given to the welfare of the animals used for testing, the doctrine of replacing, reducing and refinement (also known as the 3Rs) is now widely accepted and practiced.
This doctrine implies replacement (where possible) of animals used for testing with materials that lack feelings (insentient). But where this is not possible, the number of animals used for the testing should be reduced concomitantly with refined experimental procedures to alleviate the suffering of the experimental animals.
Progress in the Field of Animal Research
A recent report indicates that in the UK animal researchers, hitherto what obtained, are now encouraged by their institutions to disseminate their work so as to improve the public understanding of the importance of animal testing in the society. This development, the report continues, together with the new laws brought in by both the USA and UK to stem the extreme activities of some animal activists, make animal researchers in the UK (though not in the USA) feel that the incidence of activism is reduced. Hence, this would remove the fear in animal researchers of being harmed, which in turn creates a conducive environment for progress in pursuing the doctrine of 3Rs.
To accelerate the progress of the doctrine, major stakeholders have come together to promote it. One typical example is a partnership by the European Commission and major companies from seven sectors of European Industry called EPPA (European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing), which was launched in 2005, specifically to promote the progress of the doctrine.
Some of the advancements in the specific elements of the 3Rs are as follow:
Replacement of Animal Test Subjects
An alternative method (using human cells) to that of animal testing for the study of cerebral malaria proved promising that the method is being extended to other brain diseases such as those relating to encephalitis, meningitis, sclerosis and tumor metastasis.
As of March 2009, all animal testing for cosmetic products in the European Union (EU) was banned. Beginning in March 2013, sales of cosmetic products with any ingredient tested on animals will be prohibited, regardless of whether an alternative test method is available.
Reduction of the Number of Animals Used for Research
As a way of reducing the number of animals used for animal testing, this writer suggested that rather than each scientific experiment (procedure) using an animal, that several experiments (procedures) could use the same animal. Nevertheless, over the past decade there has been a gradual rise in the number of animals used in research. But this rise has been explained on the basis of the breeding experiments, with a view to understanding the relationship between genes and disease models, and in deed in the UK, the number of animals used in 2008 in testing was less than that of scientific procedures, indicative that a reduction in the number of animals for testing is in progress.
Procedures which have led to the reduction of the number of animals used in testing include the use of human blood cells (in the place of animals) for studying the standing of the zinc element in humans, and the use of non-embryonic stem cells in the repair of cornea for more than three years now. Although stem cells are still of animal tissues, the method leads to a reduction of the number of animals used, as many stem cells could be made from just an animal.
Refinement of Testing Methods
Researchers are actively seeking ways to refine the research and experimentation process to reduce the need for live subjects and to refine practices in order to reduce discomfort or stress experienced by the animals.
A new method of tunnel/cup, as opposed to tail handling of mice that was shown to reduce the anxiety in them (which in turn could affect the results using them) used for testing was recently reported.
First Steps of a Long Journey in Research
There is a view that animal research, in particular the implementation of the 3Rs, is under-reported. It therefore follows that reported progress in the implementation of the 3Rs is modest. But as adverse activism recedes, and public understanding of the importance of animal testing (and issues around it) grows, more substantial progress may come to the public domain.
However, as modest as the progress so far might seem, it could equate to the first step, which in Chinese proverb, is needed to cover a long journey.
Sources
- Valdes-Gonzalez R A, White D J, Dorantes L M et al , "Three-year Follow up of a Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus Patient with an islet Xenotransplant" Clinical Transplantation (2007) 21 (3) pp 352 - 357.
- Thompson J, "Special Report: Drug Trial Fiasco" The Independent (UK) (Health and Well Being) 26th March 2006.
- Watson J, Wetzel W J and Burkhalter J, "Human Disease caused by Dog Heartworm", J Miss State Med Assoc (1991) 32 (11) pp 399 - 401
Chinasa Anya - Chinasa (Chinny) C Anya has MSc in Metallurgy from the Polytechnic University of Bucharest Romania and PhD in Metallurgy from University ...
Join the Conversation