They see a rat, we seek a cure for diseases: the current status of animal experimentation in medical practice

Elijah O Kehinde 1

Affiliations

01 January 2013

-

doi: 10.1159/000355504

Abstract

The objective of this review article was to examine current and prospective developments in the scientific use of laboratory animals, and to find out whether or not there are still valid scientific benefits of and justification for animal experimentation. The PubMed and Web of Science databases were searched using the following key words: animal models, basic research, pharmaceutical research, toxicity testing, experimental surgery, surgical simulation, ethics, animal welfare, benign, malignant diseases. Important relevant reviews, original articles and references from 1970 to 2012 were reviewed for data on the use of experimental animals in the study of diseases. The use of laboratory animals in scientific research continues to generate intense public debate. Their use can be justified today in the following areas of research: basic scientific research, use of animals as models for human diseases, pharmaceutical research and development, toxicity testing and teaching of new surgical techniques. This is because there are inherent limitations in the use of alternatives such as in vitro studies, human clinical trials or computer simulation. However, there are problems of transferability of results obtained from animal research to humans. Efforts are on-going to find suitable alternatives to animal experimentation like cell and tissue culture and computer simulation. For the foreseeable future, it would appear that to enable scientists to have a more precise understanding of human disease, including its diagnosis, prognosis and therapeutic intervention, there will still be enough grounds to advocate animal experimentation. However, efforts must continue to minimize or eliminate the need for animal testing in scientific research as soon as possible.

Similar articles

The flaws and human harms of animal experimentation.

Akhtar A.Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 2015 Oct;24(4):407-19. doi: 10.1017/S0963180115000079.PMID: 26364776 Free PMC article.

[Animal experimentation, animal welfare and scientific research].

Tal H.Refuat Hapeh Vehashinayim (1993). 2013 Oct;30(4):16-22, 74.PMID: 24660572 Hebrew.

A Kenyan perspective on the use of animals in science education and scientific research in Africa and prospects for improvement.

Kimwele C, Matheka D, Ferdowsian H.Pan Afr Med J. 2011;9:45. doi: 10.4314/pamj.v9i1.71224. Epub 2011 Aug 25.PMID: 22355442 Free PMC article.

Animal Models in Forensic Science Research: Justified Use or Ethical Exploitation?

Mole CG, Heyns M.Sci Eng Ethics. 2019 Aug;25(4):1095-1110. doi: 10.1007/s11948-018-0053-1. Epub 2018 May 1.PMID: 29717465 Review.

The 3Rs and animal welfare - conflict or the way forward?

Rusche B.ALTEX. 2003;20(Suppl 1):63-76.PMID: 14671703 Review.

Cited by

Face-to-face and online teaching experience on experimental animals and alternative methods with nursing students: a research study.

Garcia Sierra JF, Fernandez Martinez MN, Lopez Cadenas C, Diez Laiz R, Rodriguez Lago JM, Sahagun Prieto AM.BMC Nurs. 2023 Jan 13;22(1):15. doi: 10.1186/s12912-023-01172-5.PMID: 36639785 Free PMC article.

Ethical considerations regarding animal experimentation.

Kiani AK, Pheby D, Henehan G, Brown R, Sieving P, Sykora P, Marks R, Falsini B, Capodicasa N, Miertus S, Lorusso L, Dondossola D, Tartaglia GM, Ergoren MC, Dundar M, Michelini S, Malacarne D, Bonetti G, Dautaj A, Donato K, Medori MC, Beccari T, Samaja M, Connelly ST, Martin D, Morresi A, Bacu A, Herbst KL, Kapustin M, Stuppia L, Lumer L, Farronato G, Bertelli M; INTERNATIONAL BIOETHICS STUDY GROUP.J Prev Med Hyg. 2022 Oct 17;63(2 Suppl 3):E255-E266. doi: 10.15167/2421-4248/jpmh2022.63.2S3.2768. eCollection 2022 Jun.PMID: 36479489 Free PMC article. Review.

Perspectives of pluripotent stem cells in livestock.

Kumar D, Talluri TR, Selokar NL, Hyder I, Kues WA.World J Stem Cells. 2021 Jan 26;13(1):1-29. doi: 10.4252/wjsc.v13.i1.1.PMID: 33584977 Free PMC article. Review.

Remote vitals monitoring in rodents using video recordings.

Kunczik J, Barbosa Pereira C, Zieglowski L, Tolba R, Wassermann L, Häger C, Bleich A, Janssen H, Thum T, Czaplik M.Biomed Opt Express. 2019 Aug 5;10(9):4422-4436. doi: 10.1364/BOE.10.004422. eCollection 2019 Sep 1.PMID: 31565499 Free PMC article.

Remote Welfare Monitoring of Rodents Using Thermal Imaging.

Pereira CB, Kunczik J, Zieglowski L, Tolba R, Abdelrahman A, Zechner D, Vollmar B, Janssen H, Thum T, Czaplik M.Sensors (Basel). 2018 Oct 28;18(11):3653. doi: 10.3390/s18113653.PMID: 30373282 Free PMC article.

KMEL References

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/

References

  1.  
    1. Goeke JE. The history of the use of animals in research and the development of the animal welfare concept. J Am Coll Toxicol. 1987;6:187–194. - PubMed
  2.  
    1. Pound P, Ebrahim S, Sandercock P, et al. Where is the evidence that animal research benefits humans? BMJ. 2004;328:514–517. - PMC - PubMed
  3.  
    1. Perel P, Roberts I, Sena E, et al. Comparison of treatment effects between animal experiments and clinical trials: systematic review. BMJ. 2007;334:197–200. - PMC - PubMed
  4.  
    1. Orlans FB. History and ethical regulation of animal experimentation: an international perspective. In: Khuse H, Singer P, editors. A Comparison to Bioethics. Oxford: Blackwell Publication; 1998. pp. 400–421.
  5.  
    1. Guerrini A. Experimenting with humans and animals: from Galen to animal rights. JAMA. 2004;291:2133–2134.
  6.  
    1. Watts G. Animal testing: is it worth it? BMJ. 2007;334:182–184. - PMC - PubMed
  7.  
    1. Hopley E. Campaigning against Cruelty – The Hundred Year History of the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection. London: BUAV; 1998.
  8.  
    1. Animal Welfare Organisations Universities Federation for Animal Welfare (UFAW) http://www.ufaw.org.uk (accessed May 2012).
  9.  
    1. Fund for the Replacement of Animals in Medical Experiments (FRAME). http://www.frame.org.uk (accessed January 2012).
  10.  
    1. Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA). http://www.rspca.org.uk (accessed November 2011).
  11.  
    1. Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI) 2009. http://www.abpi.org.uk
  12.  
    1. Coalition for Medical Progress (CMP). http://www.medicalprogress.org (accessed November 2009).
  13.  
    1. British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection (BUAV). http://www.buav.org (accessed November 2012).
  14.  
    1. Matfield M. The Animal Liberation Front: terrorist attacks on animal research. Scand J Lab Anim Sci. 1996;23:31–35.
  15.  
    1. Thomas D. Laboratory animals and the art of empathy. J Med Ethics. 2005;31:197–202. - PMC - PubMed
  16.  
    1. Nuffield Council on Bioethics . The Ethics of Research Involving Animals. London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics; 2005.
  17.  
    1. Blackmore C, Pearlfield T. Missing evidence that animal research benefits humans. BMJ. 2004;328:1017–1018. - PMC - PubMed
  18.  
    1. Giles J. Animal experiments under fire for poor design. Nature. 2006;444:981. - PubMed
  19.  
    1. Schuler AM, Wood PA. Mouse models for disorders of mitochondrial fatty acids β-oxidation. Inst Lab Anim Res. 2002;43:57–65. - PubMed
  20.  
    1. Abbot A. Geneticists prepare for deluge of mutant mice. Nature. 2004;432:541. - PubMed
  21.  
    1. Choo OL, Kuo G, Weiner AJ, et al. Isolation of a cDNA clone derived from a blood borne non-A, non-B viral hepatitis genome. Science. 1989;244:359–362. - PubMed
  22.  
    1. Eggers HJ. Milestones in early poliomyelitis research (1840–1949) J Virol. 1999;73:4533–4535. - PMC - PubMed
  23.  
    1. Rutty CJ. The middle-class plague: epidemic polio and the Canadian state (1936–1937) Can Bull Med Hist. 1996;13:277–314. - PubMed
  24.  
    1. Lewis AD, Johnson PR. Developing animal models for AIDS research – progress and problems. Trends Biotechnol. 1995;13:142–150. - PubMed
  25.  
    1. Cohen J. AIDS vaccine trial produces disappointment and confusion. Science. 2003;299:1290–1291. - PubMed
  26.  
    1. Klausner RD, Fauci AS, Corey L, et al. Enhanced: the need for a global HIV vaccine enterprise. Science. 2003;300:2036–2039. - PubMed
  27.  
    1. Takahashi N, Smithies O. Human genetics, animal models and computer simulations for studying hypertension. Trends Genet. 2004;20:136–145. - PubMed
  28.  
    1. Zon LI, Peterson RT. In vivo drug discovery in the zebra fish. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2005;4:35–44. - PubMed
  29.  
    1. Gibbs RA, Weinstock GM, Metzker ML, et al. Genome sequence of the Brown Norway rat yields insights into mammalian evolution. Nature. 2004;428:493–521. - PubMed
  30.  
    1. Herrera VL, Ruiz-Opazo N. Generic studies in rat models: insights into cardiovascular diseases. Curr Opin Lipidol. 2005;16:179–191. - PubMed
  31.  
    1. Corley TAB.The British Pharmaceutical Industry since 1851. Available at: http://www.rdg.ac.uk/Econ/Econ/workingpapers/emdp404.pdf (accessed January 2009).
  32.  
    1. AstraZeneca Take a Walk Along the Path to a New Medicine. 2003. Available at: http://www.asterazeneca.com/sites/7/imagebank/typeArticleparam502178/see... (accessed November 2011).
  33.  
    1. Berthet FX, Coche T, Vinals C. Applied genome research in the field of human vaccines. J Biotechnol. 2001;85:213–226. - PubMed
  34.  
    1. MacGregor JT. The future of regulatory toxicology: impact of the biotechnology revolution. Toxicol Sci. 2003;75:236–248. - PubMed
  35.  
    1. Griffin JF. A strategic approach to vaccine development: animal models, monitoring vaccine efficacy, formulation and delivery. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2002;54:851–861. - PubMed
  36.  
    1. Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry Clinical Trials – Developing New Medicines. 2003. Available at: http://www.abpi.org.uk/publications/briefings/clinical_brief_pdf (accessed October 2009).
  37.  
    1. Stephens ML, Conlee K, Alvino G, et al. Possibilities for refinement and reduction: future improvements within regulatory testing. ILAR J. 2002;43((suppl)):S74–S79. - PubMed
  38.  
    1. Greaves P, Williams A, Eve M. First dose of potential new medicines to humans: how animals can help. Nat Rev Drug Disc. 2004;3:226–236. - PubMed
  39.  
    1. Olson H, Betton G, Robinson D, et al. Concordance of the toxicity of pharmaceuticals in humans and in animals. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2000;32:56–67. - PubMed
  40.  
    1. Lo WY, Friedman JM. Teratogenicity of recently introduced medications in human pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 2002;100:465–473. - PubMed
  41.  
    1. Ennever FK, Lave LB. Implications of the lack of accuracy of the lifetime rodent bioassay for predicting human carcinogenicity. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2003;38:52–57. - PubMed
  42.  
    1. Sung GT, Sun Y. Animal laboratory training: current status and how essential is it? In: Hemal AK, Menon M, editors. Robotics in Genitourinary Surgery. London: Springer; 2011. pp. 147–156.
  43.  
    1. Hammoud MM, Nuthalapaty FS, Goepfert AR, et al. To the point: medical education review of the role of stimulators in surgical training. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;199:338–343. - PubMed
  44.  
    1. Vlaovic PD, Sargent ER, Boker JR, et al. Immediate impact of an intensive one-week laparoscopy training program on laparoscopic skills among postgraduate urologists. JSLS. 2008;12:1–8. - PMC - PubMed
  45.  
    1. Pierorazio PM, Allaf ME. Minimally invasive surgical training: challenges and solutions. Urol Oncol. 2009;27:208–213. - PubMed
  46.  
    1. Roberts KE, Bell RL, Duffy AJ. Evolution of surgical skills training. World J Gastroenterol. 2006;12:3219–3224. - PMC - PubMed
  47.  
    1. Wignall GR, Denstedt JD, Preminger GM, et al. Surgical stimulation: a urological perspective. J Urol. 2008;179:1690–1699. - PubMed
  48.  
    1. Balasundaram I, Aggarwal R, Darzi A. Short-phase training on a virtual reality simulator improves technical performance in tele-robotic surgery. Int J Med Robot. 2008;4:139–145. - PubMed
  49.  
    1. Lin DW, Romanelli JR, Kuhn JN, et al. Computer-based laparoscopic and robotic surgical stimulators: performance characteristics and perceptions of new users. Surg Endosc. 2009;23:209–214. - PubMed
  50.  
    1. Horrobin DF. Modern biomedical research: an internally self-consistent universe with little contact with medical reality? Nat Rev Drug Disc. 2003;2:151–154. - PubMed
  51.  
    1. Fletcher RH. Evaluation of interventions. J Clin Epidemiol. 2002;55:1183–1190. - PubMed
  52.  
    1. Chalmers I. Well-informed uncertainties about the effects of treatments. BMJ. 2004;328:475–476. - PMC - PubMed
  53.  
    1. Striker BH, Psaty BM. Education and debate article: detection, verification and quantification of adverse drug reactions. BMJ. 2004;329:44–47. - PMC - PubMed
  54.  
    1. Neumann A, Weill A, Ricordeau P, et al. Pioglitazone and risk of bladder cancer among diabetic patients in France: a population-based cohort study. Diabetologia. 2012;55:1953–1962. - PMC - PubMed
  55.  
    1. Zhu Z, Shen Z, Lu Y, et al. Increased risk of bladder cancer with pioglitazone therapy in patients with diabetes: a meta-analysis. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2012;98:159–163. - PubMed
  56.  
    1. European Medicines Agency European Medicines Agency recommends new contra-indications and warnings for pioglitazone to reduce small increased risk of bladder cancer http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Press_release/2011/... (accessed January 23, 2013).
  57.  
    1. Piccinni C, Motola D, Marchesini G, Poluzz E. Assessing the association of pioglitazone use and bladder cancer through drug adverse event reporting. Diabetes Care. 2011;34:1369–1371. - PMC - PubMed
  58.  
    1. Morris T, Goulet S, Morton D. The international symposium on regulatory testing and animal welfare: recommendations on best scientific practices for animal care in regulatory toxicology. ILAR J. 2002;43((suppl)):S123–S125. - PubMed
  59.  
    1. Morton DB, Jennings M, Buckwell A, et al. Refining procedures for the administration of substances. Lab Anim. 2001;35:1–41. - PubMed
  60.  
    1. Nicholson A, Sandler J, Siedle T. An evaluation of the US high production volume (HPV) chemical-testing programme. A study in (ir)relevance, redundancy and retro thinking. Altern Lab Anim. 2004;32(suppl 1):335–341. - PubMed
  61.  
    1. Combes RD, Balls M. How much flexibility is possible when validating new in vivo toxicity test methods? Altern Lab Anim. 2003;31:225–232. - PubMed
  62.  
    1. Dunn DA, Kooyman DL, Pinkert CA. Foundation review: transgenic animals and their impact on the drug discovery industry. Drug Discov Today. 2005;10:757–767. - PubMed
  63.  
    1. May M. A new era for clinical models. Science. 2012;335:994–996.
  64.  
    1. Carlson H-E, Schapiro JS, Farah I, et al. Use of primates in research: a global overview. Am J Primatol. 2004;65:225–237.
  65.  
    1. Shively CA, Clarkson TB. The unique value of primate models in translational research. Am J Primatol. 2009;71:715–721. - PubMed
  66.  
    1. C. elegans Sequencing Consortium Genome sequence of the nematode C. elegans: a platform for investigating biology. Science. 1998;282:2012–2018. - PubMed
  67.  
    1. McClellan-Green P, Romano J, Oberdorster E. Does gender really matter in contaminant exposure? A case study using invertebrate models. Environ Res. 2007;104:183–191. - PubMed
  68.  
    1. Van de Waterbeemd H, Gifford E. ADMET in silico modeling: towards prediction paradise? Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2003;2:192–204. - PubMed
  69.  
    1. Bikandi J, Millan RS, Rementeria A, Garaizar J. In silico analysis of complete bacterial genomes: PCR, AFLP-PCR and endonuclease restriction. Bioinformatics. 2004;20:798–799. - PubMed
  70.  
    1. Kalendar R, Lee D, Schulman AH. Java web tools for PCR, in silico PCR, and oligonucleotide assembly and analysis. Genomics. 2011;98:137–144. - PubMed

Page Navigation