• Question: Do any of you use animals to test chemicals / drugs on? I understand that there is a lot of controversy about the rights of animals being less important than humans since they can be reproduced in greater quantities but isn't there the risk that if a drug was tested on a rat for example, that even if the rat responded well to it then a human who used it afterwards would react differently? Does the number of white blood cells make a difference on how effective the drug is on an animal / person? If not then what does?

    Asked by morgancope to Damien, Rachael, Simon, Suzi, Tim on 17 Jun 2011.
    • Photo: Suzi Gage

      Suzi Gage answered on 17 Jun 2011:

      Hi @morgancope
      Great question. I’ve not done any animal testing, but I think it’s important to test some things (like new medicines) before they are tested on humans. I completely disagree with the testing of makeup and such on animals.

      You are right that rats are not identical to humans, so you cannot be completely sure that a drug tested on animals will automatically be fine to use with humans. Testing has to occur on humans as well before a drug can be given to the general public, or those who are ill.

      I don’t know the answer to your white blood cells question – perhaps someone else here does?

      Thanks for the question – what are you views on animal testing?

Comments

  • Photo: morgancope

    morgancope commented on :

    I’m a vegetarian so anything that involves animal rights deteriorating for the sake of science or whatever else I’m completely against.
    If an animal reacted badly to a drug they had been tested on with, there might be a possible risk of a contagious disease being formed if the animal’s body reacted really badly and the scientists working with the animal could even catch is so nobody can win really lol. I don’t know if that would ever happen but it’s just a thought.

  • Photo: Suzi

    Suzi commented on :

    Hi @morgancope
    I don’t think a contagious disease would be formed in this way, a disease that hurt or killed the animal might, but not a contagious one. I know what you mean about the deterioration of animal rights being a bad thing, and I’m a vegetarian too.
    However, animals who are used in lab experiments are usually treated much better than animals that are family pets for example. They get handled and played with every day, and kept in clean environments, so they often live a lot longer than family pets, where they don’t get played with every day, and sometimes are forgotten about so not fed every day, or not cleaned out as often as they should be.

    I agree that unnecessary testing on animals is wrong, but when it comes to something that could save millions of human lives, it becomes more difficult to decide…

    • Photo: morgancope

      morgancope commented on :

      Well this proves that you shouldn’t listen to everything you hear! I’ve always thought that they were kept in awful conditions.
      And yes it definitely does become more difficult to decide. I feel horrible for saying this but I’d rather “pests” like rats were tested on rather than any other animals. I mean they can have something like 10 babies at one time can’t they? So that wouldn’t be too much of a problem I don’t think.

      • Photo: Suzi

        Suzi commented on :

        It is a tough choice but sometimes tough decisions have to be made!
        Yes I know what you mean about rumours that they live in bad conditions, but I have been to a lab that a friend works in, and in UK the law is really strict, the most strict in the whole of Europe, that the animals have to be kept in humane conditions.