Some studies published in top medical journals have repeatedly shown that trying to infect animals with diseases they don't normally get for animal testing is not only wasting valuable resources, but also wasting animal and human lives. Many cutting-edge research methods (without the use of animals) can not only save animals from suffering, but also lead to a more promising future for human health. Despite this, some pro-animal testing rhetoric is still prevalent, and we have listed some common claims to refute them one by one.
Remark 1: "Every major medical advance can be attributed to animal experimentation. ”
This is simply not true. An article in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine evaluated the statement and concluded that there was no evidence to support the statement. Most animal experiments are not related to human health and do not meaningfully help medical progress, and many experiments are just out of curiosity, and even disdain to use the promise of curing diseases as a guise. The only reason people mistakenly believe that these experiments are helping humanity is that the media, experimenters, universities, and lobby groups exaggerate the potential of animal experiments to lead to new treatments, and also exaggerate the role of animal experiments in past medical advances.
Remark 2: "If we don't use animals, we have to test new drugs on humans. ”
The truth is that we have already tested new drugs on humans. No matter how many experiments are done on animals, someone has to be the first human subject. Animal experiments are so unreliable that human experiments are riskier. The FDA has pointed out that 92% of all drugs proven safe and effective in animal experiments are ineffective or dangerous in human experiments. Half of the small group of drugs approved for human use were reclassified due to side effects that had not been previously detected in animal experiments.
Remark 3: "We must observe the complex interactions between cells, tissues, and organs in living animals. ”
It is questionable at best to take healthy animals from completely different species, artificially inflict diseases that they would not normally be infected with, and keep them in an unnatural and stressful environment, and then try to apply the results of experiments to diseases that humans naturally suffer. There are also huge differences in the physiological response of different species to drugs (even between the same species). Penicillin can kill guinea pigs, but it is not effective against rabbits; Aspirin kills cats and causes birth defects in rats, mice, guinea pigs, dogs, and monkeys; Morphine has a calming effect on the human body, while it has a stimulating effect on goats, cats and horses. In addition, animal behavior in the laboratory often shows extreme psychological stress, and the experimenters admit that the use of these overstressed animals can affect the validity of the experimental data.
Remark 4: "Animals help fight cancer. ”
Since 1971, Americans have spent hundreds of billions of dollars on cancer research through taxes, donations, and private funds, but the return on that investment has been dismal. A survey of 4,451 anti-cancer drugs developed between 2003 and 2011 found that more than 93% of these drugs failed after entering the first phase of human clinical trials, although these drugs were successful in animals. The initiators of the survey pointed out that it is difficult to predict how drugs will work in humans by building animal "models" of human cancer through technologies such as transplanting human tumors into mice.
Remark 5: "Science has a responsibility to use animals to constantly find cures for human diseases. ”
Billions of dollars are spent on animal experiments in the United States every year, and nearly $3 trillion is spent on medical care. Funding for animal testing and the number of animals continue to increase, but Americans only rank 42nd in life expectancy in the world and have higher infant mortality rates than other developed countries. In 2014, a review article co-authored by a professor at Yale School of Medicine was published in the top medical journal The BMJ, documenting the alarming failure of animal experiments in improving human health, concluding: "If studies conducted on animals have not been able to make reasonable predictions about expected outcomes in humans, then public recognition and funding of preclinical animal research seems outdated." ”
Remark 6: "Many experiments are not painful for animals, so they make sense." ”
In the United States, the Animal Welfare Act is the only law governing the use of laboratory animals, which allows animals to be burned, electrocuted, poisoned, isolated, starved, restrained, drug addiction, brain damage. No matter how painful or meaningless the experiment is, it will not be banned, and even painkillers are not necessary. Even when alternative methods for animals are feasible, U.S. law does not require the use of alternative methods, and often they are not used. Because the Animal Welfare Act explicitly excludes rats, mice, birds, and cold-blooded animals, 95% of the animals used in the laboratory are not within the minimum protections of federal law. Because these animals are not protected, the experimenters do not have to take pain-relieving measures on them.
Between 2010 and 2014, nearly 5 billion animals (excluding rats, mice, birds and cold-blooded animals) were subjected to painful experiments and were not given pain relief. In 2009, a survey by the University of Newcastle in the United Kingdom found that only 20% of rats that underwent painful, invasive procedures, such as cranial surgery, burn experiments, and spine surgery were given pain relief measures at a later stage.
Remark 7: "We don't want to use animals, but we have no other choice. ”
The most significant trend in modern research is the recognition that animals are difficult to be good models of the human body. Human clinical and epidemiological research, based on methods of human tissue and cells, cadavers, sophisticated and realistic human patient simulators, and computer models, has the potential to become a more reliable, accurate, cheaper, and more humane alternative to animal experimentation. Using human cells and tissues to build fully functional organ chips, researchers can study diseases and develop and test new drugs to treat diseases. Enlightened scientists have developed models called "microbrains" using human brain cells that can be used to study tumors, artificial skin, bone marrow. We can now use reconstructed human cells to perform skin irritation tests, human cells to make and test vaccines, and blood samples to diagnose pregnancy without killing rabbits.
Animal experimentation continues not because it is the best science, but because of the constraints of old habits, resistance to change, and lack of promotion and education.
Remark 8: "Don't medical students have to dissect animals?" ”
Medical schools in the United States no longer use animals to train students, and students applying to medical school do not need to have experience in animal anatomy or live animal experiments. Medical students are trained by combining sophisticated human patient simulators, interactive computer programs, safe body-based teaching methods, and clinical experience.
Nowadays, a person does not need to harm any animal to become a board-certified surgeon. Some professional medical organizations, such as the American Board of Anesthesiologists, even require doctors to complete simulation training to obtain board certification rather than animal experiments.
In the UK, medical students, including veterinarians, are not allowed to perform surgical training on animals.
Remark 9: "Animals are for human use. If we sacrifice 1,000 or 100,000 animals to benefit 1 child, it is worth it. ”
If experimenting with a person with intellectual disabilities could benefit 1,000 children, would we do it? Of course not! Ethics tells us that the value of each life itself should not be replaced by its potential value in the eyes of others. In addition, money wasted on animal experiments could have been invested in modern non-animal technologies to help humans.
The story of the cat's "little trouble"
