Animal research is still the best option

Animal research is a controversial topic. It's critical for science and medicine, but is it "right" or ethical? New technologies are allowing scientists to conduct experiments in all kinds of new model systems. So that means that research that depends on animals like flies, mice, rats, monkeys, and more would be obsolete and unnecessary, right? Unfortunately, this is not the case. Today, animal research still plays a pivitol role in helping us understand biology, which significantly improves human health and well-being. At the same time, we’re learning more every day about these animals and their intelligence. There is a real debate to be had about what is "okay" or not. So what does that mean for science? And will we ever be able to do away with animal research for good? Join me in this fascinating examination of the intersection between science, ethics, and animal welfare.

----CITATIONS----

Wadman, Meredith. “FDA No Longer Needs to Require Animal Tests before Human Drug Trials.” Science, 10 Jan. 2023

Fenwick N, Griffin G, Gauthier C. The welfare of animals used in science: how the "Three Rs" ethic guides improvements. Can Vet J. 2009 May;50(5):523-30. PMID: 19436640; PMCID: PMC2671878.

Grimm, David. “Has U.S. Biomedical Research on Chimpanzees Come to an End?” Science, 18 Aug. 2015

“PHS Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals.” National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

“Why Are Animals Used in NIH Research?” National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 9 Apr. 2018
--------

Alternatively, if you wanna support the channel and get some fun emojis to use in comments and a badge next to your name in the process, consider becoming a "member" of our channel right here on YT:

We couldn’t do all of this without our awesome Patreon Producers, Ryan M. Shaver, Danny Van Hecke, Carrie McKenzie, and Jareth Arnold. You four are like warm sunshine on a cool day!

And thanks to our other high-level Patrons, including:
Marcelo Kenji
12tone
Linda L Schubert
Susan Jones
Ilsa Jerome
k b
Raymond Chin
Marcel Ward
Memming Park

[bronsonvann]

If anyone reading this does want to start looking into alternatives to animal testing, I'd recommend looking up the work of faculty in Centers for Alternatives to Animal Testing. I know they have them at Brown and Hopkins. Harvard's stem cell institute also has done some work with disease-in-a-tissue modelling. There's also likely some journals that highlight disease modeling and toxicology testing using iPSCs, so that would also be a good place to start.

[batintheattic]

I was a member of BUAV (British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection) back in the late eighties. I've had many discussions about animal testing. Some of my dad's friends were university lecturers involved in pharmaceutical research. This one man (who is and was lovely) got so angry with me. He berated me about peaches for over an hour (medical students sometimes practiced surgery on peaches) but I was reading articles about exactly what finally seems to be happening - the technological shift from animal testing to what I understood to be algorithms and computer modelling. Thank you, ?Ali, for appearing to have found the most eligible path through, and out the other side of (soon I hope), the darkness. A mutual path. I wonder if my dad's friend is watching all this unfold. I'm glad of the new iteration of researchers.

[romanski]

I have one question: Why aren't the three R's applied to other animals like pigs, cows etc. as well? I mean, I can accept that there is good justification for animal testing, but following from that, it is very much obviously the case that buying meat should be reduced to an absolute minimum, ideally 0 (which is possible most of the time).

[Quazey]

Great video, I learned a lot

Btw there's some flickering a few pixels wide in the bottom and right edges in the parts recorded on your camera

[gabrieltmacedo]

Great video! If I may add something to it, it's the use of non-rodent models in basic research (e.g. zebrafish, worms, etc)! Some questions that can't be tackled with cell research can be answered using those 'in vivo' models too. They are more cost-efficient and can generate faster results. Dealing less pain/suffering can also be an advantage but that is a subject for a whole other video, I guess.

[ImBalance]

Takeaway: We should all stop supporting factory farming / animal agriculture though.

Excellent video and comprehensive discussion around the use of animals for laboratory research, their significance, and the stringent standards implemented.

[Ivymykitty]

If they cared so much about these lab animals mental stimulation and decently size cages would be a must

[Tree-House]

I feel it might be off, aside from calling out contradictions in certain people, to follow up concerns about something like euthanasia with what boils down to "They are pests-" "People don't like them anyway", separating it from say, US norms or differing levels of intelligence, many monkey species are pests to villages near their natrual habitat, they are incredibly intelligent, raccoons are often pests here, yet they are fairly complex and intelligent, while pointing out how often there is a waste of life of these animals outside of testing is fair, boiling it down to "they are pests" "they aren't popular", to me, is incredibly off. I don't think the testing you did is bad, yet on the same side of things, I dont believe those arguments are good justifications, maybe I'm off in my thinking, but needless to say, an animals level of intelligence, pain, etc, isn't dictated by if it's a pest in your personal life or if it's not currently a trendy or cute animal in certain cultures, so outside of things like pointing out contradictions or waste of life, bringing it up seems... Pointless, other than trying to convince people it's ok on the basis not of ethics, but on the basis of disgust or dislike of the animal(s) in question.

[Alex-moog]

Your videos are always a pleasure to watch. Thank you, and props to you for tackling this hard topic.

[pampoovey]

You can't drop all those cool names without explaining them. What is an immortal cell line?

[bronsonvann]

"Some of these lab animals are treated better than our pets" Ok, if that's the case, would you put your cat through this testing? If it's so much better than how we treat pet animals like dogs and cats, there really shouldn't be any problem with it. Or is it the case that maybe we don't want to subject our pets to these small, mind-numbing environments to get injected with whatever toxic chemical needs to be tested, only to have them be euthanized and discarded when they've outlived their usefulness.

[kristinagisele]

This is awesome how she mentions animal rights and really puts the whole thing into perspective .
Ideally maybe we won’t need to use Animal testing one day ..my self who worked in an Animal Lab previously and others are 100% in agreement .
It’s a tough field seeing animals getting euthanized after Experiments so constantly and potentially getting attached .

[vgree]

“Free access to water”.
As if in other instances, they have to pay for it. Lol.

[debatology]

very informative! thank you for sharing your experience and for offering a well constructed vision of the issues whilst allowing the viewer to make up their own mind

[DonQuiKong]

Overall a great video, but that passage with the bible quote was very strange.
You presented that as if it would hold any weight, and not as a citation of the argument from a neutral position.
(you may have intended to, but it did not seem neutral).

That part just seemed a little bit misplaced since you didn't go anywhere with it.

[MM-qppd]

There is a way to eliminate animal testing. Dr. Shiva Ayadurai created computer technology that helps eliminate animal testing. Dr. Shiva is the ONLY Presidential candidate who competent enough to explain this kind of science and invent it.

[alexhenke]

Animal research is unfortunately still essential in developing new cancer drugs. I personally put more weight on human life than animal life. And by the way, human cancer drugs are also used by veterinarians to treat cancer in e.g. dogs.

[Soapbubbles]

This is a great take, thank you. It seems like there’s so much misinformation about using animals for research. I blindly supported such sentiments before becoming a biology student. Cosmetics are one thing but cancer research or vaccine development is a different story. Wish technology would move faster so we could fully switch to non animal methods but that’s just not the world we’re in yet 😕

[feedback]

Before anyone reads this, I'm talking about live animals here, not cell cultures or anything.

I have a big problem with the unreflective arrogance humans have to think themselves worth more than non-human animals. There is no coherent or logical argument that can be made proving or even suggesting this. For this reason alone, animal research, animal testing and animal farming should not exist. We as a species are stuck in a "might makes right" morality. We have dominion over other animals and therefore we use the power we have to torture and kill them, for the purpose of entertainment, sensory pleasure (food) or (medical) research. While medical research is the least bad of those option, it still leaves the question why other sentient beings should have to suffer and die for us. What makes us worth more? Until anyone can give a trait that has actual moral value which makes us morally different from non-human animals, we should not be allowed to kill or harm them in any way, even if their "involuntary sacrifice" might save human lives. After all, people don't steal toddler or small kids who can't defend themselves and inject potentially dangerous substances into them. Violating the rights of an individual for the (potential) gain of another individual can never be morally justified. Saving yourself from a disease is not a basic right, but not being physically abused and killed is, as well as your freedom.

Despite this pretty important ethical argument, there are several medical organisations that say animal testing is not needed and should be fazed out due to the ethics of it.

While I do think that your discussion about ethics is important, I don't agree with you. So I would want to ask you this question: Do you think that humans are worth more than other animals? And if yes, why? If you think that and want it to become a maxim of action, you need to be able to state at least one morally relevant difference.

[Zamasu-fused-corrupted]

Ok go to the doctor and tell them to put stuff on your eyes and nose and arms