Animal Testing Perspectives » Misconceptions

Brussels conference puts spotlight on alternatives to animal testing

edteam — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 10:36:26 +0000

It won’t be long now until the annual European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing (EPAA) conference which takes place on 9 November here in Brussels.

The EPAA is an independent platform which brings together the European Commission and industry groups to collaborate on implementing the 3 Rs Declaration. It has been running since 2005 and has done a lot to bring together people who don’t talk as much as they should – like companies and regulators, or scientists and EU officials.

Last year’s event put the focus on ‘reduction and refinement’ while this time around the spotlight is on Integrated Testing Strategies (ITS) in animal research.

ITS can be tricky to define but is essentially a way to connect animal research methods, non-animal testing techniques and computer-based modelling to advance the cause of our old friends, the 3Rs.

Last month the EPAA ran a workshop on ITS so the annual conference is a natural follow-on from that.

The discussion will look at how ITS can be applied in a way that delivers efficient science-based results while reducing the use of animals, but at the same time meeting the growing demands of authorities and legal risk assessors.

Given Europe’s current obsession with innovation and competitiveness, it will be interesting to see whether ITS can really be the silver bullet that delivers all the information scientists need without compromising on speed, cost, or product safety. Plus, given that we’re in Brussels, one wonders what the EU can do to promote the use of appropriate ITS?

Can public and private stakeholders work together on non-competitive projects that will ultimately benefit all, perhaps along the lines of the Innovation Medicines Initiative?

The conference programme looks busy so hopefully we’ll get some answers on 9 November. We’ll be attending with a video to capture feedback from the day.

Animals react very differently from humans and therefore rendering the experiments unreliable

Admin — Tue, 15 Mar 2011 12:30:18 +0000

Animals and humans are both mammals, which means biologically they share the same basic types of organs – heart, lungs, liver, kidneys etc, and that work in the same way, controlled via the bloodstream and nervous system. There are minor differences too, however these can give scientists clues about diseases and how they might be treated.

Monkeys have been used to advance deep brain stimulation for Parkinson’s disease; research with mice is helping develop new treatments for leukaemia and lymphoma; rabbits and cattle helped with cervical cancer vaccines, and goats in developing blood clotting agents from milk.

Around a third of medicines used by vets are also used in the treatment of humans.

Animals are kept in appalling living conditions

Admin — Tue, 15 Mar 2011 12:29:21 +0000

In reality research centres using animals must follow strict and detailed EU laws to ensure the most appropriate environment for laboratory animals and that their needs are met. For example mice and rats are housed in cages that contain shredded paper and pieces of wood to build nests and to find refuge. Animals also have opportunities to climb and explore. They are encouraged to perform their habitual activities, which reduce stress. Scientists have no reason to mistreat research animals and good reason for treating them well, because the use of unhealthy, stressed or frightened animals reduces the reliability of an experiment’s results. Staff are trained to handle the animals in a way that will reduce any potential stress.

Scientists are free to choose animals for research over alternative methods

Admin — Tue, 15 Mar 2011 12:28:56 +0000

Legislation demands that before any research study using animals can be approved, it must be evaluated from a moral and scientific standpoint, by an independent ethical committee. Scientists must submit a detailed report justifying the need, usefulness and relevance for animal testing as well as evidence that there are no alternative methods to perform the research. The ethical panels evaluate the likely harm to the animal versus the expected benefits of the project.

Animal welfare groups don’t care about humans

Admin — Tue, 15 Mar 2011 12:28:41 +0000

It’s a misconception that animal welfare groups who campaign for alternative testing and research methods, don’t care about human safety. They want the best legislation to ensure human safety, scientific testing and animal welfare.