AFMA Americans
for Medical Advancement
March 2006
Would drugs be safe for us without being tested first on animals?
Yes. Drugs would be just as safe and probably safer than they now are if
the animal testing phase was eliminated. Presently, legal drugs kill more
people per year than all illegal drugs combined.
It is first important to recognize that drugs do not spring from lab animal
to bottle. There are four methods of designing drugs. Scientists begin by
one of the following methods:
Once researchers have theorized about a substance's usefulness, they
administer it to animals to see whether or not it works on them. They obtain
plenty of feedback about the substance's effectiveness in the species
tested. Positive animal results are reported in the popular press, generally
mentioning only scantly the huge unbuilt bridge between lab animal results
and human cures. At this stage there is still no reliable information about
what the substance will do in humans, because our metabolism is unique.
Though subjecting the substances to animal testing is designed to reveal
anticipated effects and side effects in humans, very often the results
differ dramatically between species. Substances that could save many human
lives are not approved because they are harmful to animals. And substances
that are therapeutic in animals get approved, then harm and sometimes kill
humans. Instead of safeguarding human consumers, animal testing creates a
false sense of security.
The proof of this is apparent in any thorough assessment of drug development
history. Numerous of our most popular drugs including aspirin, acetaminophen
(Tylenol) and ibuprofen (Advil or Motrin), can be quite detrimental to
animals. Diuretic medications, a mainstay in the treatment of hypertension,
were in common use before animal testing became the rage. Many of these
drugs, safely used by millions, would be hard pressed to pass today's
mandatory mouse tests.
There is justifiable concern that animal tests are preventing us from
acquiring much- needed medications, one scientist stating:
...for the great majority of disease entities, the animal models either do not exist or are really very poor. The chance is of overlooking useful drugs because they do not give a response to the animal models commonly used.
Innumerable animal-tested drugs make it to market, and then cause
problems. It is well accepted that approximately 100,000 deaths per year
from legal drugs, and approximately fifteen per cent of all hospital
admissions are caused by adverse medication reactions. In one decade more
than half of all newly approved medications were either withdrawn or
relabeled by the FDA secondary to severe unpredicted side effects. All of
these drugs had undergone extensive animal testing!
Clearly, the animal testing protocol works against human safety. It also
diverts valuable research dollars away from solid human-based testing
methodologies.
Go on to: Animal Experimentation - Frequently Asked Questions: If we don't use animals, what will we use?
Return to Animal Rights Articles
Read more at Alternatives to Animal Testing, Experimentation and Dissection