Alternatives: From Test Tubes to Computers

Are animal models necessary in all research, or are there alternative methods that are better suited to the situation at hand? First and foremost, one must discover what the alternatives to animal testing are. 

One is in vitro testing, which is testing drugs or a vaccine in test tubes using human cell and tissues cultures. Computerized models are also used, as well as stem cell and genetic testing methods. Non-invasive imaging techniques, like MRI, are another example. And a final one is micro dosing, which is when “humans are given very low quantities of a drug to test the effects on the body on the cellular level, without affecting the whole body system” (Neavs.org). (Click here to link to the source used for this post.)

These alternative tests all have their own benefits. Animal models may not always be the most accurate models for research, such as in drug testing. Many animals have a different response to medication than humans do. Not only were many drugs not passed because they did not pass animal testing, but there are some drugs that were successful in animals, but failed in clinical trials with humans.

In vitro testing is often used because it tests drugs on human cell and tissue cultures so that researchers can have a better idea of how the drug works on humans. Computerized models are also very accurate and can be used to predict the outcome of drug or vaccine testing. In addition to being more reliable, alternative tests are also more cost-efficient.

Because of this, many people feel that alternatives are a better option for testing. In "Alternatives to Animal Testing Should be Pursued," an article in the book Animal Experimentation, Pardue quotes Dr. Martin Stephens, who agrees that animal testing is "expensive, time consuming and often have dubious applicability to humans" (Pardue 79). Pardue additionally states in her article that there are alternatives, such as cell cultures, that are more accurate and should be used in place of animals.

I agree with some of the points that the article makes, especially where it states that as long as researchers use animals respectfully and try to replace them when needed. However, I am still skeptical about how it claims that animal experimentation can and should be completely replaced. (Remember, always be skeptical and question what you read!)

So are there any disadvantages to alternative testing methods? What are the pros and cons, and how do they compare with the advantages and disadvantages of animal models?

Animal Models in MS Research

Animals have played a large role in medical research, from cancer research to creating vaccinations. But how have they affected research specifically? And just how useful are they?

Multiple Sclerosis (MS) is “a chronic immune-mediated demyelinating disease of the central nervous system” (Denic, 2). In simpler terms, it’s an inflammatory disease where the myelin sheath, which is the protective covering on the axons of nerve cells, degenerate, which causes cognitive and physical disability. Its true causes are unknown and it’s not yet well understood, so finding a cure is difficult.

Using animal models, mostly mice, researchers have been able to understand parts of the disease and its progression. Although MS is a human disease, other animal diseases are used as models. One is experimental autoimmune/allergic encephalomyelitis (EAE), which models MS inflammation. Other models include viral models, such as Theiler’s murine encephalomyelitis virus (TMEV), or toxin-induced models. Each plays a part in modelling a condition similar to a certain aspect of MS. With the lack of biopsy or autopsy samples from humans, these models are invaluable in helping to better understand MS and creating “partially effective preventive treatment modalities… [that] are now available to modify the disease course” (Denic, 2). 

However, there is also the question of effectiveness. Because EAE and the other models are not true models of MS, sometimes treatments that are successful in animal EAE models are unsuccessful or harmful in MS. In addition, EAE and MS do have many differences, such as different immune cell types that are prevalent in the disease, that question whether or not it is useful.

Overall, animal models are important in understanding the progression and effects of MS, as well as developing possible treatments. However, possible treatments studied with these models should be interpreted carefully. In the case of MS research, animal models are one of the few ways we can understand MS. But are animal models necessary in other diseases where there are alternative methods?

Click here to link to the online journal article.

Finding Sources

            There’s something about starting the search for books and articles on your topic; it’s an exciting feeling. You almost forget how little you know and how much you’re learning as you start reading through many different sources.

            My trip to the library yielded me three very interesting books: Why Animal Experimentation Matters, Animal experimentation: Opposing Viewpoints, and Animal Experimentation, (whose citations are available in the Works Cited page here.)

            Just reading through some of these chapters has already given me ideas on how to approach or organize my research. It’s interesting to see how the arguments are built. For example, in Animal Experimentation: Opposing Viewpoints, Jack Botting and Adrian Morrison discuss in their article, "Animal Research is Vital to Medicine," how animal experimentation was crucial to many medical developments and refute some of the claims of animal-rights supporters.

          What I found most interesting was how they defended the use of animals. Many sulfanilamide drugs were tested on animals, and this was proved to be a good choice. Prontosil, one of the compounds, was found to have no effect on bacteria in vitro, but successful in combating infection in mice. From this other drugs were created to treat infections. (Botting, Morrison 81).

In Why Animal Experimentation Matters, part IX of the article "The Paradigm Shift Towards Animal Happiness" give a background of how important animal experimentation has been in medical research—from curing smallpox to finding a vaccine for rabies. The most interesting part is that these developments have helped both humans and animals. “Vaccines for distemper, parvovirus, rabies… [and] antibiotics—all these and much more have been developed using research animals” (Tannenbaum 124). Treatments for diseases, and even nutritional foods, have all bettered the lives of animals through animal experimentation.

“Animal Research Saves Lives” (from Animal Experimentation) reiterates the important role animal testing has played in history. Sabin describes how animal experimentation led to the polio vaccination. I agree with how she explains that those who believe animal experimentation should end are not looking at the big picture. “Every child who has… [had] the Sabin Vaccine knows polio only as a word… Thank heavens it’s not a part of their reality” (Sabin 11). This last quote shows just how important animals have been in research, and that by banning it, we are possibly shutting the door on possible future treatments.

This is just the beginning. As I continue to go through these articles, I hope to discover not just the good, but also the bad of animal experimentation. Despite past developments, is it still valuable today? What are some of the claims made by animal-rights supporters? Will they cut holes into the idea of the importance of animal testing, and how will they, in turn, be contradicted?

Forming New Ideas

            Research is something that everyone does, more often than one would think. Research doesn’t just mean sitting in a lab or making a new discovery that will revolutionize science and technology— it can be much simpler. Research is when you look up different colleges and majors to decide where you want to apply. It’s when you look up new coupons and sales for a trip to the mall, or when you check the stock market statistics to make a decision on whether or not to buy a certain stock.

            Research serves the basis for a lot in our lives, even the small things. But for extended research, like writing a paper on a specific topic, it can be a daunting task. Researching and compiling what you find to put it into words is always a challenge. If you want to start a research process, the best way to begin is to choose a topic that you love and go with it.

            But how do you know what you want to research? What are you willing to learn about and devote your time to? If you can’t think of a topic to start with, start by looking up a broad topic that interests you, or read some articles in a magazine or journal that you find intriguing. Take notes and free write. Write down as many ideas as you have, and from there you’ll be able to narrow it down. This part isn’t always simple, and isn’t always easy, but once you clear this hurdle and have your beginning, it will drive you forward.

            And so this is where I stand now, trying hard to search for a question that intrigues me. There are many broad topics that draw my attention, such as cancer research, new scientific discoveries, and even controversial topics like animal experimentation in research. However, narrowing it down is where I am stuck. But as I explore different possible questions and topics, such as the role of animals in cancer research, or perhaps how training helper animals is similar and/or different to what is done in animal experimentation, I can unravel new ideas that will help me to embark on my path towards beginning my research.