It’s one of science’s most controversial ethical dilemmas: should we still be testing on animals? And, if not, what viable alternatives are out there?
In most areas of life we’ve moved beyond animal abuse. Or at least for those of us who wish to vote with our feet, there are viable, ethical alternatives. Just think: if you don’t want to eat meat, there is a perfectly delicious plant-based hamburger on most menus. Don’t want to wear leather or fur? Lucky you: most high street retailers now use only imitation fur, feather, and suede products, with many imitation leather alternatives out there too.
Whether it’s made of plastic (an issue in itself) or more environmentally friendly options like mushroom, imitation leather has become a viable, durable, and realistic l0oking alternative. Add to that the huge increase in vegan-friendly, cruelty-free cosmetics and beauty products, and you’ll be feeling pretty good about yourself when it comes to your impact on our furry and feathered friends.
But what about those other products that you’ve never even thought of – or, perhaps, prefer no to. What about the chemicals that you spray around your house, the medications you collect from your local pharmacy, the surgery that you may find yourself having to undergo. Have you ever considered the ethical ramifications of these, or how they came to be used in such a way?
Unfortunately for the animal lovers among us, animal testing is still rife. Whether it’s to do with chemical toxicology or medical and surgical health interventions, anything that could harm a human is generally extensively tested on animals first.
And this doesn’t just mean giving them a quick spritz with a chemical that could go into your surface cleaner, and then letting them go on their way. Instead, animals are bred for life in a lab, and that is where they spend the entirety of their lives. And they really are there until their deaths: one type of testing, known as the LD50 (with LD standing for ‘lethal dose’) sees the animals exposed to chemicals that are toxic to them.
This kind of testing, which thankfully is on the decline, has been used for decades as a way of ascertaining what the lethal dose of a chemical is. As the animals continue to suffer, scientists continue to inject, feed, or force them to breathe more and more of the chemicals that are being tested.
And the remaining animals? At the point that half of the test subjects have died from their exposure to the substance, the remaining 50% are also killed. Those who survived up until this mass cull are then subject to dissection, with scientists noting the effects of the chemicals on their bodies and organs.
The animals involved? Many of the creatures that you know and love – may even share a home with – are subject to these ruthless processes. Dogs and cats, rabbits and mice, even monkeys are restricted to this sorry life in a lab, in which they are, quite literally, born to die.
But this is all horrifying – why on earth would we do this to innocent animals?
Well herein lies the dilemma. Tests like LD50 give scientists important information about lethal doses. This information will help save the lives of humans and other animals down the line.
While genocidal dictators – think Hitler, Pol Pot, and others – have horrifyingly conducted similar studies on humans, generally it is considered entirely unethical to conduct early stage experiments on people.
And unfortunately for animals, science’s ability to breed them in specific ways and control their lives and conditions in ways that would not be possible for humans, means that they are still commonly used, as Harvard Medical School explains:
“Even though scientists are continually trying to minimize the use of animals and to replace them with non-animal alternatives, animal research remains critical and necessary to comply with legal requirements, for ethical and safety reasons, and to address other scientific and practical considerations.
For some types of research, animals must be engineered to have or lack certain genes. None of this is possible in humans.”
So as we move forward as a species, becoming more considerate towards the lives of other species, what alternatives to animal testing are there?
Thankfully, they are more common than you might think. According to a report recently published in the academic journal Science, plenty of viable alternatives to animal testing both exist, and are actively being used in labs worldwide:
“Although animal toxicity studies have proven essential for identifying potential human risks, finding ways to reduce the use of animals and develop effective alternatives is an important effort. Advances in biology, engineering, and artificial intelligence have created new opportunities to improve our ability to assess safety, quality, and effectiveness of many consumer products.”
With particular focus on the testing of chemicals on lab-grown human cells, the study demonstrates exactly how cruelty free experimentation can, in many cases, be conducted. Instead of relying on animals for some kinds of cosmetic and medicine testing, for example, lab-grown cells can demonstrate to scientists whether or not a product would be harmful to human eye health:
“Development of these alternative ocular methods took years of method development and validation. Their acceptance […] has essentially eliminated the reliance on in vivo eye irritation studies to support new human drug applications for the past several years.”
While this is great news for animal lovers and the animals themselves, there are further benefits to futuristic testing methods (which include lab grown cells and computer simulations, among other solutions). Most importantly, the fact that in many ways humans and animals are fundamentally different. By testing on human cells – without the harmful involvement of actual humans – scientists can see the full effects of chemicals and medicine on humans.
By cutting out the animal middleman, and the possibility that substances will affect humans and animals differently, scientists can test more thoroughly, more accurately, and more efficiently.
Though the research is ongoing, and this can sometimes be more expensive than animal testing, the cost is surely worth it if long and painful suffering is prevented, and human and animal lives are both saved.
If you think that’s impressive, check out this story about a “goldmine” of lithium that was found in the U.S. that could completely change the EV battery game.
