Finished research project

At someones behest, i have put this here (also in my blog)

Friday, June 26, 2009
Finished research project
Here it is! the project that sucked my life up! As anyone who knows me can see, this is a subject im slightly obsessed about anyhow!!
Like I said I was sort of restricted on how I went about doing this thing , So that will effect the finished project. Take it for what it is please.
Also you will notice a distinct lack of right and wrong, (As anyone who knows me again, will know that I am a big one on the moral issues dealing with this subject) That was a part of the assignment.

The topic I have been researching to quite some length is alternatives to non-human animal testing namely replacing non-human animals in experimentation for human products. I have also been researching the effectiveness of the information gleaned from the alternative methods.

The animal experimentation industry spends millions and millions of dollars a

year to persuade the public that all medical advances are directly due to animal experimentation,which simply isnt true. Once we actually looked up the true origins of the advance in the scientific literature, we either found a clinical discovery, serendipity or some other non-animal based discovery had previously revealed the knowledge which animal experiments later “validated” on animals. (Greek and Greek)

I plan to prove that there are other methods available besides using non-human animals in testing for human products , and that using animals for testing is unnecessary and can be downright dangerous.

Hippocrates fathered the concept of clinical research. He taught that by observing enough cases, physicians can predict the course of a disease both in terms of it’s likely effect and vulenerable population.Hippocrates methodology has stood the test of time . Clinical observation still proves our most accurate and useable information.(Greek and Greek..)

Then in Rome in the second century the revered physician Galen threw Hippocrates work severly off course. The Bishop of Rome supported by the state banned human autopsies .Galen cut into goats ,pigs and monkeys from Africa. He became the father of vivisection.(The “art” of cutting into live animals for science) He performed many experiments by cutting into live animals. His theories were far from accurate and stagnated research for years to come. Years later human cadaver dissection eventually eliminated many of Galens inaccuracies. Sadly, even though Galens theories were PROVEN incorrect animal experimentators often cite his work inaccurately and behind a cloud of distortion. “In the early 1990’s the american medical association published a white paper, promoted as a history of animal experimentations contributions . The publication is a feat of omission and distortin as is apparent by its citations in this book of which the following is the first: The Roman physician Galen used apes and pigs to prove his theory that veins carry blood rather than air. They neglect to mention that as a human observer and physician to gladiators (among others) Galens observations of humans were more than adequete to this conclusion. He did not require animals.” (Greek/Greek)The ANA and the animal experimentation contingency failed to mention the scope of Galens errors and how they cast a shroud over medical progress for the next 1600 years.

Doctors administrated to the sick with treatments governed by Galend’s four humor theory. One of these methods being bloodletting(Blood shed or revoval of blood usually from a vein as a therapeutic measure) and thousands of people died from it. “Negative attitudes toward dissection of the human body ,the stranglehold of Galen whose four humor doctrine of qualities and inaccurate anatomy virtually paralyzed progress in medical science for centuries” (Greek /Greek)

“Nei Sing: The book that provides the basis for chinese medicine complied nearly three thousand years before Galen described the blood flowing from the heart in a continuous circle”(Greek/Greek)

One of the alternative methods I am recommending is human autopsy and study of cadavers. Virtually the whole field of(accurate) modern medical knowledge was created through studies of autopsies aided and supported by phisiology,physical diagnosis and microbiology It was the autopsy study that ushered in the modern era. R.B. Hile-(Greek/Greek)

If only one out of every five cadavers were autopsied,we would still gain a massive amount of valuable information. Why not make more funds available for autopsies rather than unreliable animal testing?

Human trials are still necessary, those who say we test on animals to avoid human testing are wrong. Once animal studies are complete, all new medications are evaluated on humans. The first people to take a new substance are being experimentated on as surely as if they were guinea pigs locked in a laboratory.(Greek/Greek)

Animal experimentation contiunes in part to this day because it offers a simple legal sanctuary for the medical and household product industries. In short: If they convince the public that animal testing makes your household products and medications safe to use,They are less likely to get sued. Thus the public is assured Its products are safe and the experimentation community can go on with business as usual. And this business is positively booming.

It is estimated that up to 1,000,000,000 rats and mice are used each year. Charles River labs charge $14.00 for each inbred mice and $56.00 for each inbred rat, $123.00 for guinea pigs and $720.00 for mini swine. Charles River sells at least 22 million animals a year to researchers.(Greek and Greek)

This does not include primates and the equipment necessary to restrain and control them. Or dog/cat breeding facilities where a sixteen week old kitten can fetch an average of $223.00. Then take into account cages and clinical carts,bedding,watering equipment,food,chemicals used to analyze the rodents blood,DNA analysis,chinchillas,rabbits,pharmaceuticals and all the other things I wasn’t able to list here , and you have a multi billion dollar industry.

Another form of proof that the animal model is not conductive to humans involves analysis on their own formula. “The strongest tenent that arises from science is predictability . To be reliable, a model should have predicitve value. That is science. In medicine,strong models assume four factors : The same symptoms,The same postulated origin of disease,The same neurological mechanism and the same treatment response. The truth is though certain animals may fulfill some of the same criteria as humans in some instances, NO animal consistently fulfills all four. This means that animals are not strong models for human disease It also means that all data recovered from animal model experiments must be scaled. Scaling is a scientific term that generally refers to “The fudge factor” Since we are all putting our lives and the lives of our loved ones in the hands of supposedly righetous science,Is not a model that requires so much fudgery scaling grossely inaccurate? Especially since humans provide the perfect models?

Dr. Ralph Hayword Director Huntington Research Center stated: “And the best guess for the correlation of adverse reactions in man and animal toxicity data is somewhere between five and twenty five percent” Those odds make animal testing more hit and miss than tossing a coin” (Greek/Greek)

There is also the factor of side effects not being considered here. Such as headaches ,nasuea etc. As we cannot know when a rat has a headache ,some of the side effects may not be known until people start taking the drug(s).

Here are just a few examples of an untrustworthy animal model.

Thaliomide-A drug that was intended to allievate morning sickness caused horrible deformities in babies. The drug was approved because animal testing had not indicated deformities in animals. Only when given 10-300 times the normal amount(depending upon the animal) did SOME species give birth to deformed babies.

In the case of Insulin-Because of animal studies,many scientists did not believe the pancreas had anything to do with diabetes or even in the existence of insulin.

“A scientist Pflygen stated that the pancreas does not play any part at all in the origin of diabetes, whether in fact there is such a thing as pancreatic diabetes”(Greek/Greek)Thanks to dog experiments it was believed Diabetes was a liver disease. “The liver is involved in carbohydrate metabolism but this is not insulin resistance on the cellular level, or a lack of insulin production for the pancreas” (greek/Greek,McCoy). And in fact, a Nobel prize was awarded to two scientists Macleoud and Banting involving tests in dogs and the administering of dog insulin to a fourteen year old boy.” Banting had stated that the dog insulin had resulted in a marked reduction in the boys glucose level when in fact, it only went down 25% and was accompanied by serious side effects.and a second dose was not given due to the ineffectiveness of the first. S. Ballip a biochemist on Bantings team said: “The production of insulin originated in a wrongly concieved, wrongly conducted and wrongly interpreted series of experiments Banting experimented on some dogs, and by shehappanstance, persuaded peole who had knowledge of in vitro research tolook for insulin and to purify it.”(Greek/Greek)

Some Government agencies such as the Food and DrugAdministration no longer require the LD50 test. Or the lethal dose 50% test. Where doses of a chemical are administered to a group of animals until 50% of them die. And will accept in vitro tests for genotoxicity,drug protein binding,drug metabolism,skin penetration and bioavilibrility as well as photoreactivity or skin irritation. Even the FDA official confessed “Most of the animal tests we accept have never been validated ,They evolved over the last twenty years and the FDA is comftorable with them” Here are a few examples of products, while beneficial to humans,almost never made it to the market.

Depo Vera (contraceptive) was at first banned because it caused cancer in dogs and babboons. Streptomycin, a popular antibiotic causes malformation in baby rats. Lithium was tested on guinea pigs for forty years before it was accepted, due to complications.Tacromilus,an anti rejection agent, was almost dropped before even reaching clinical trials because research on dogs proved to be too toxic to proceed to clinical trials.corticosteroids cause cancer in SOME animals, Penicillin was delayed and almost dropped due to the fact that it had no effect on rabbits, Prilosec was almost cancelled due to ill effects on animals.Isoniazed, a tuberculosis med, causes cancer in animals,Lasix causes liver damage inmice, rats and hamsters. Fluoride causes cancer in rats.

And what of the possibility of missing out on good medications because of adverse effects in animal testing? It seems a strong possibility.

Lets now got to some of the alternatives,focusing on replacement of the animal model in research.

One alternative I would support would be human volunteers. This is some

thing that is already happening from drugs to sleep deprivation in small groups

An alternative series of experiments not inflicted on animals and more pertinent to humans ,have been described by C. Leuchtenberger and associates. They exposed human lung cultures to marijuana and tobacco smoke in a smoking machine and demonstrated abnormal cell growth and chromosome disturbances, precursors to cancer (Pratt) Also testing the urine of smokers has been a proven method. “In 1976 Tragen and Jensen at Rockerfeller University succeeded in growing plasmoden or the parasites which cause malaria as a continuous culture in a suspension of HNA red blood cells. It has since been possible to make the parasites complete their life cycle in laboratory culture . This should provide an alternative to the use of the monkey as a model for the disease process (Pratt) And the vaccine research as well.

Alternatives in accurate testing of irritants The mucous secreting epi thetical cells of the mouth are of some value here They can safelyand easily be removed by gently scraping the lining of the cheek. And in the laboratory, their response to irritant or corrosive substances can be observed through a microscope (Pratt)Also, If deeper analysis of the digestive tract needs to be done, A bioposy tube can be used to safely remove full thickness mucous samples from the intestines or the wall of the stomach.

Epidemiological studies(Looking at the occurrence and distribution of diseases of various populations of people) that is to say Certain things we already know such as diet and cigarette smoking effects to the pregnant woman. We should keep records of this stuff and have it used to save time and money(and lives) in unnecessary experiments.

Then there is the choice of Human fetal research .There is already a list of ethics of moral,social and medical implications of using fetuses in Britian. We could gain knowledge on birth defects,fetal size in relation to maternal smoking habits,carb metabolism in oxygen deficient fetuses,effects of intravenous feeding,culture of renal tissues ,chromosome studies and etc.

The Corrositex testing system uses a synthetic membrane testing system designed to mimic the effect of corrosives on living skin. A respected and widely used method that already saves a lot of non-human lives, especially rabbits from dermal corrosivity tests. (When a spot of the animals body is shaved and corrosive agents are then placed on the skin of the animal.) Corrositex saves time. You can get accurate results in two to four hours. Unlike animal testing, which can take up to two to four weeks. It is also very cost effective.

Creative scientists have used human brain cells to develop a model “micrro brain” which can be used to study tumors.

These lists (which is by no means an exaustive list) should show that there are alternatives just as or even more accurate than using non-human animals in research. This research should prove that the “animal model” is not trustworthy for human health. Only by embracing the future of medicine, and not desperately clinging on to old ways, simply because those ways have always been, can we step into the light of a new future that is truly safe and sound.

Afterthought: I hope this has sparked interest in at least a few of the people who have sat in the peer groups with me, or have listened to me read exerpts in class. There is so much more to this topic then I could squeeze into a 8-10 page portfolio. I encourage anyone interested to delve deeper into this subject. Also, one aspect I regretably could not reflect in this paper was the moral aspect.

Every year, millions of animals suffer real pain,feel real fear and experience real death, just so our mascara can stretch our lashes a bit further or our toilet bowl can be a bit brighter. Please keep this in mind when you go to the store.

Works cited:

All ten of my sources inspired me in different ways, but the three I directly quote here are:

Pratt,Dallas. M.D. Alternatives to pain in experiments in animals Argus Archives,

1980

McCoy,J.J. Animals in research, Issues and conflicts Impact Books,

1993

Greek,Ray C.M.D./Greek,Swingle,Jean D.V.M. Sacred cows and Golden Geese

The Continuum International Publishing Group Inc., 2000

And thank you to Ryan Huling of Peta 2 For being the only person to answer my e-mail (or phone call) about an interview. He gets the credit for the mentioning of the microbrain.

2:25 PM 0 Comments(Add Comment) |0 KudosTranslatePowered by