I know all about the alternatives to animal testing, but I don't get why these alternatives are not being used. Is it because they are too expensive? Sometimes the alternatives are actually more accurate than the whole-animal method. So...?
2007-04-26 16:19:13 · 4 answers · asked by plainblueyes 1 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Zoology
There are two main reasons.
First, the alternatives are not as good as some would like to make out. Some alternatives (eg computer modelling) are highly prone to error. Others can give good results for effects on isolated tissue but no clue on how a chemical reacts in a whole organism.
Secondly, the regulatory regime. By law drugs have to be tested on animals before they can be given to humans. This is to try to prevent fatalities in humans because of unexpected side effects.
2007-04-26 16:30:39 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I really don't know to be honest. I assume that maybe most of the time the alternatives maybe be less accurate(sometimes there are time where it is different). Or it could be because it far to expensive. But then again, they should ask they can get money from the government so they can do alternatives.
2007-04-26 16:31:33 · answer #2 · answered by Elizabeth W 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is simpler to understand. If you give a rat something to eat and it dies, then that food was poisonous. It is hard to reproduce that on a slide. Similarly with drug use.
The areas which are being replaced most successfully are topical products, like cosmetics, where reactions on specific cell cultures on slides mirror the allergic reactions and harmful effects which could occur on skin, so it is not necessary to test on animals.
You should be buying only cosmetics and toiletries which state that they are not tested on animals. That would be the quickest way to stop this testing. But I suspect that a lot of people don't care enough.
2007-04-26 19:00:30 · answer #3 · answered by Labsci 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
because we don't live in new zeland.
in 1999, new zeland made a law about animal testing. It is illegal to perform scientific testing on a non-human humanoid, unless it is in the best interest of the non-human humanoid.
ik, it didn't make sense to me either, but then i substituted "non-human humanoid" with the word animal, and it makes much more sense.
2007-04-27 11:28:21 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋