Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Medicine and Health Sciences
Predicting Human Drug Toxicity And Safety Via Animal Tests: Can Any One Species Predict Drug Toxicity In Any Other, And Do Monkeys Help?, Jarrod Bailey, Michelle Thew, Michael Balls
Predicting Human Drug Toxicity And Safety Via Animal Tests: Can Any One Species Predict Drug Toxicity In Any Other, And Do Monkeys Help?, Jarrod Bailey, Michelle Thew, Michael Balls
Laboratory Experiments Collection
Animals are still widely used in drug development and safety tests, despite evidence for their lack of predictive value. In this regard, we recently showed, by producing Likelihood Ratios (LRs) for an extensive data set of over 3,000 drugs with both animal and human data, that the absence of toxicity in animals provides little or virtually no evidential weight that adverse drug reactions will also be absent in humans. While our analyses suggest that the presence of toxicity in one species may sometimes add evidential weight for risk of toxicity in another, the LRs are extremely inconsistent, varying substantially for …
The Flaws And Human Harms Of Animal Experimentation, Aysha Akhtar
The Flaws And Human Harms Of Animal Experimentation, Aysha Akhtar
Experimentation Collection
Nonhuman animal (“animal”) experimentation is typically defended by arguments that it is reliable, that animals provide sufficiently good models of human biology and diseases to yield relevant information, and that, consequently, its use provides major human health benefits. I demonstrate that a growing body of scientific literature critically assessing the validity of animal experimentation generally (and animal modeling specifically) raises important concerns about its reliability and predictive value for human outcomes and for understanding human physiology. The unreliability of animal experimentation across a wide range of areas undermines scientific arguments in favor of the practice. Additionally, I show how animal …
The Flaws And Human Harms Of Animal Experimentation, Aysha Akhtar
The Flaws And Human Harms Of Animal Experimentation, Aysha Akhtar
Morality and Ethics of Animal Experimentation Collection
Nonhuman animal (“animal”) experimentation is typically defended by arguments that it is reliable, that animals provide sufficiently good models of human biology and diseases to yield relevant information, and that, consequently, its use provides major human health benefits. I demonstrate that a growing body of scientific literature critically assessing the validity of animal experimentation generally (and animal modeling specifically) raises important concerns about its reliability and predictive value for human outcomes and for understanding human physiology. The unreliability of animal experimentation across a wide range of areas undermines scientific arguments in favor of the practice. Additionally, I show how animal …
The Multifactorial Role Of The 3rs In Shifting The Harm-Benefit Analysis In Animal Models Of Disease, Melanie L. Graham, Mark J. Prescott
The Multifactorial Role Of The 3rs In Shifting The Harm-Benefit Analysis In Animal Models Of Disease, Melanie L. Graham, Mark J. Prescott
Biomedical Research and Alternative Methods Collection
Ethics on animal use in science in Western society is based on utilitarianism, weighing the harms and benefits to the animals involved against those of the intended human beneficiaries. The 3Rs concept (Replacement, Reduction, Refinement) is both a robust framework for minimizing animal use and suffering (addressing the harms to animals) and a means of supporting high quality science and translation (addressing the benefits). The ambiguity of basic research performed early in the research continuum can sometimes make harm-benefit analysis more difficult since anticipated benefit is often an incremental contribution to a field of knowledge. On the other hand, benefit …