 |
Animals in Scientific Research
Science of the Future
Drs. Ray and Jean Greek, and others, have pointed out that the theory of evolution and molecular biology predict that animal models will be very poor models of human disease. In light of modern scientific thought and the mass of empirical data, the burden of proof lies with those who claim the animal model is productive.
In science, the burden of proof falls on the claimant, not the critic. Therefore, we ask those who claim that animal models are valid to “show us the data” that supports their case. They have not been able to do. We suspect that they will not be able to do so in the future as such data seems not to exist.
This section divides biomedical research into disciplines like human-based research such as epidemiology, in vitro, research with human tissue, genomics, drug discovery and development and so on and technology-based research. These divisions are artificial; epidemiology, a human-based research modality, uses technology and even in vitro research to analyze data and to draw conclusions. Genomics is human-based, uses technology, is mainly an in vitro type of research and involves human tissues. This is the nature of biomedical research; there must be overlap, as no area of biomedical research stands alone, just as no body part exists independent of the others.
Unlike animal studies, the great advances in science that have given us the high standard of medical care we enjoy today are the result of human-based research, most notably clinical observation, epidemiology, post-mortem examinations (autopsies), human tissue research, genetics, in vitro research, pathology, and advances in technology.
Technology-based research has given us computer and mathematical modeling and CT and MRI scanners. The specialization of physicians, nurses, and hospitals, along with reforms in public sanitation, has increased the length and quality of life. In the not-too-distant future, drug prescriptions will be customized to a patient’s individual genetic profile, thus eliminating adverse drug reactions.
Some may be disappointed that we do not offer a one to one replacement for currently used animal models. In other words, we do not present animal test or model X and say “replace it with Y.”
As we have shown in our previous works, the animal model is no longer adequate for modeling human disease or testing drugs, hence, the paradigm needs to be replaced. If the paradigm is incorrect, it is highly unlikely that useful data will come from experiments based upon it. (For example, basing research on the old notion of four bodily humors will probably not yield useful data.)
Empirical evidence such as we have presented confirms this. Discussing individual animal tests or animal models has, to a great degree, already been done. The purpose of this information is to show the myriad testing and research options available today that are scientifically viable, not to outline why animal test X should be replaced by nonanimal test Y. If animal test X is not efficacious then it should be abandoned--regardless of what else is out there--simply because it does not work.
|
 |
