Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

United States is the last country in developed world to still use chimps in medical testing


Burgold

Recommended Posts

Looks like the NIH is taking a lead in beginning to curtail that process.  I suppose it made sense at one point to use chimps as they seemed like a really close cousin to us and therefore a good analogy.  Wondering how everyone feels about animal testing?  To me, there's some gray.  Clearly, we're not to the point where we can drop a little solution in a petri dish and watch the interaction with some cells and know how how a new drug can impact an organism as complex as a human being.  More, the FDA mandates animal testing before going to human trials.  So, critters aren't going away as guinea pigs :)  but on the other hand, we've gotten more sophisticated with genetics and computer modeling.

 

I think there remains a role for animal testing, but I think I agree with the NIH in their decision to drop chimps though that decision may be influenced by the expense and our affection for our simian friends.

 

For more info on this, I spoke with the Vice President of the Humane Society this week.  Obviously, she comes down on one side of the issue, but it was a fun chat and we covered everything from problems in animal testing to what do you do with chimps if you aren't going to use them as test subjects and the difficulties of integrating them into a setting like a preserve or getting them to socialize if they have not before.

 

http://voicerussia.com/radio_broadcast/72430379/116860653.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know I may come across as the villian on this, but I do not agree with pulling chimps out of ALL medical animal testing.

Remember doing research paper on this in college; we should not be using animals to test things like when chemicals get into our eyes by squirting it dead in their eye socket. At the same time, the reason we test on chimps isn't just because how close their are to us geneticly, but because you cannot simulate or forsee every chemical/biological reaction with a computer simulation. That's why you test on an animal because you don't know how it's going to react so you can't program a computer to look for something that it doesn't know how or what to look for. Testing on chimps should be limited to only medical (and on a conservative basis), but not eliminated.

A lot of these drugs out now have some nasty side effects, so I want them to be tested to the best of ones ability to make sure they're safe. As a consumer and a son who's watching my parents pill popping to help stay alive right now that's just how I feel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that's villainous, Renegade7.  In fact, I get it.  There's a part of me that questions why I'm more okay with animal testing on clownfish or mice than chimps and other than a food chain answer I don't have a great reason.

 

Like you, I think it should be limited and as science advances even more limited.  One of the reasons I think there really is still a role is longitudinal effects.  For example, let's say you develop a drug to battle chicken pox.  Even if it seems to work immediately and have no miserable side effects and maybe we can determine that through genetic tests... what happens if that drug sits in the body for a period of time... are there long term detriments.  I don't think we can do that using cells because they don't live long enough.

 

Still, there are other types of testing that feels wrong. Research done for cosmetics is the classic example.  If you need to find out the effect of a new lipstick... maybe you should try it out on something other than a pig.

 

Overall though, I do kind of find it surprising that we are the last country standing in terms of chimp testing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the issue with even chimps though is that we are different enough that things that seem safe in chimps aren't safe in humans and vice versa.

 

This is especially true because of due to costs, you are always looking at  relatively small and genetically/phenotypically not diverse population of chimps you are testing on to draw conclusions about a comparably large and diverse human population.

 

Smaller/cheaper organisms and cell cultures allow for more diverse tests quicker and easie

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get the medical testing to a point, but to test cosmetics and deoderents on animals is just cruelty. I have never seen another way around it. We have gotten to far from nature for sure.

Can you clarify on what you mean gotten to far from nature for sure.

If you wouldn't put it in your body, you probably don't want it on your body. Nature provides plenty of healthy medicinal and cosmetic products, but people want everything treated or created.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are droves of terminally diseased humans lining up for experimental drugs.  And they can't have them before the chimps do?

 

The fact that we're even having a debate on chimp vs. human rights speaks volumes about our innate interspecies sensitivity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...