Leading article: Alas, animal experiments are still needed

Tuesday 21 June 2011 00:00 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Britain has among the toughest legislation on animal experiments in the world. The Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act of 1986 controls any experimental or scientific procedure applied to an animal which may have the effect of causing it pain, suffering, distress or lasting harm. Both the scientist and the research project need separate licences, and any subsequent changes to the project must be registered and approved before the work can continue. It is therefore dismaying that the pressure group Animal Aid should feel it necessary to call for a boycott of medical charities that support animal experiments.

First, it re-opens a debate that most scientists considered closed: why we need to experiment on animals. Animal experiments have played a critical role in just about every medical breakthrough of the last century. They are vital for testing the safety of drugs and vaccines, from common painkillers to advanced anti-cancer treatment. They may not be perfect, and human trials are also vital, but without them medical advances would be seriously hampered. Cancer, strokes, heart disease, diabetes, Parkinson's and Alz-heimer's are just some of conditions for which animal experiments have benefited research.

There are alternatives. Drugs can be tested on human tissue and living cells grown in the laboratory. But it will be years before they replace animals. What alarms many is the sharp rise in animal testing over a decade – which reflects the big increase in funding for medical research, public and private. The development of genetically modified animals has also improved understanding of how humans will respond to a treatment.

So we are learning more from animal experiments than in the past. Genetically modified animals accounted for over half of all animal experiments in 2009, compared with just 8 per cent in 1995. More than nine out of 10 of these animals were mice and rats. Animals have been used by man for thousands of years – for food, clothing and as beasts of burden. Medical testing, provided it is done humanely and kept to a minimum, is another benefit we should welcome, while continuing to develop alternatives.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in