What Animals Are Used For Cosmetic Testing

Each yr, more 100 meg animals—including mice, rats, frogs, dogs, cats, rabbits, hamsters, guinea pigs, monkeys, fish, and birds—are killed in U.S. laboratories for biological science lessons, medical grooming, marvel-driven experimentation, and chemical, drug, nutrient, and cosmetics testing. Before their deaths, some are forced to inhale toxic fumes, others are immobilized in restraint devices for hours, some have holes drilled into their skulls, and others have their skin burned off or their spinal cords crushed. In improver to the torment of the actual experiments, animals in laboratories are deprived of everything that is natural and important to them—they are confined to barren cages, socially isolated, and psychologically traumatized. The thinking, feeling animals who are used in experiments are treated like nothing more than dispensable laboratory equipment.

Animal Experiments Are Wasteful and Unreliable

A Pew Research Center poll found that 52 percent of U.South. adults oppose the use of animals in scientific research, and other surveys suggest that the shrinking group that does accept brute experimentation does and so just because it believes it to be necessary for medical progress.^5,6 The bulk of creature experiments exercise not contribute to improving human wellness, and the value of the office that fauna experimentation plays in well-nigh medical advances is questionable.

In an commodity published in The Journal of the American Medical Clan, researchers found that medical treatments developed in animals rarely translated to humans and warned that "patients and physicians should remain cautious about extrapolating the finding of prominent animal enquiry to the intendance of human being illness … poor replication of even high-quality creature studies should be expected by those who conduct clinical research."⁷

Diseases that are artificially induced in animals in a laboratory, whether they be mice or monkeys, are never identical to those that occur naturally in man beings. And because beast species differ from one another biologically in many significant means, information technology becomes even more than unlikely that brute experiments volition yield results that will be correctly interpreted and practical to the human condition in a meaningful way.

For example, according to former National Cancer Establish Director Dr. Richard Klausner, "We accept cured mice of cancer for decades, and it but didn't piece of work in humans."⁸ This conclusion was echoed by former National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director Dr. Elias Zerhouni, who acknowledged that experimenting on animals has been a boondoggle. "We accept moved away from studying human illness in humans," he said. "We all drank the Kool-Aid on that one, me included. … The problem is that it hasn't worked, and it's time nosotros stopped dancing effectually the problem. … Nosotros need to refocus and adapt new methodologies for use in humans to empathize disease biology in humans."⁹

The data is sobering: Although at least 85 HIV/AIDS vaccines accept been successful in nonhuman primate studies, as of 2015, every one has failed to protect humans.¹⁰ In one case, an AIDS vaccine that was shown to be constructive in monkeys failed in human clinical trials considering it did not foreclose people from developing AIDS, and some believe that it made them more susceptible to the affliction. According to a study in the British newspaper The Independent, one conclusion from the failed study was that "testing HIV vaccines on monkeys before they are used on humans, does non in fact work."¹¹

These are non anomalies. The National Institutes of Health has stated, "Therapeutic development is a plush, complex and fourth dimension-consuming procedure. The average length of time from target discovery to approval of a new drug is nigh fourteen years. The failure rate during this procedure exceeds 95 pct, and the cost per successful drug tin can be $1 billion or more."¹²

Enquiry published in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine revealed that universities commonly exaggerate findings from animal experiments conducted in their laboratories and "oftentimes promote research that has uncertain relevance to homo health and do not provide central facts or admit of import limitations."^thirteen 1 study of media coverage of scientific meetings concluded that news stories ofttimes omit crucial information and that "the public may exist misled about the validity and relevance of the science presented."¹⁴ Because experimenters rarely publish results of failed animal studies, other scientists and the public do non have ready access to information on the ineffectiveness of animal experimentation.

What's the hidden cost of animal experiments? Our augmented reality experience will prove you.

Try It Now

Funding and Accountability

Through their taxes, charitable donations, and purchases of lottery tickets and consumer products, members of the public are ultimately the ones who—knowingly or unknowingly—fund animate being experimentation. One of the largest sources of funding comes from publicly funded government granting agencies such as NIH. Approximately 47 percent of NIH-funded research involves experimentation on animals, and in 2020, NIH approaching most $42 billion for research and development.^15,16 In addition, many charities––including the March of Dimes, the American Cancer Guild, and countless others—utilize donations to fund experiments on animals. 1-tertiary of the projects funded by the National Multiple Sclerosis Society involve animal experimentation.¹⁷

Despite the vast amount of public funds existence used to underwrite animal experimentation, it is almost impossible for the public to obtain current and complete information regarding the brute experiments that are beingness carried out in their communities or funded with their revenue enhancement dollars. State open-records laws and the U.S. Liberty of Information Human activity can exist used to obtain documents and information from state institutions, government agencies, and other federally funded facilities, simply individual companies, contract labs, and animal breeders are exempt. In many cases, institutions that are subject field to open-records laws fight vigorously to withhold information nigh beast experimentation from the public.¹⁸

Oversight and Regulation

Despite the countless animals killed each yr in laboratories worldwide, most countries have grossly inadequate regulatory measures in place to protect animals from suffering and distress or to forbid them from being used when a non-animal arroyo is readily bachelor. In the U.S., the species most usually used in experiments (mice, rats, birds, fish, reptiles, and amphibians) comprise 99% of all animals in laboratories but are specifically exempted from even the minimal protections of the federal Animal Welfare Act (AWA).^19,20 Many laboratories that utilise only these species are not required by police force to provide animals with hurting relief or veterinarian care, to search for and consider alternatives to fauna utilise, to have an institutional committee review proposed experiments, or to exist inspected past the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) or any other entity. Some estimates indicate that as many equally 800 U.S. laboratories are not discipline to federal laws and inspections considering they experiment exclusively on mice, rats, and other animals whose apply is largely unregulated.²¹

As for the more than 11,000 facilities that the USDA does regulate (of which more than one,200 are designated for "inquiry"), simply 120 USDA inspectors are employed to oversee their operations.²² Reports take repeatedly concluded that even the minimal standards ready along by the AWA are not existence met by these facilities, and institutionally based oversight bodies, called Institutional Brute Care and Apply Committees (IACUCs), take failed to bear out their mandate. A 1995 report by the USDA'southward Office of the Inspector General (OIG) "found that the activities of the IACUCs did not always meet the standards of the AWA. Some IACUCs did not ensure that unnecessary or repetitive experiments would not be performed on laboratory animals."²³ In 2000, a USDA survey of the agency'southward laboratory inspectors revealed serious problems in numerous areas, including "the search for alternatives [and] review of painful procedures."²⁴ A September 2005 audit report issued by the OIG plant ongoing "bug with the search for culling research, veterinary care, review of painful procedures, and the researchers' use of animals."²⁵ In December 2014, an OIG report documented continuing problems with laboratories failing to comply with the minimal AWA standards and the USDA'southward weak enforcement actions declining to deter time to come violations. The audit highlighted that from 2009 to 2011, USDA inspectors cited 531 experimentation facilities for 1,379 violations stemming from the IACUCs' failure to adequately review and monitor the use of animals. The audit likewise determined that in 2012, the USDA reduced its penalties to AWA violators past an average of 86 percent, fifty-fifty in cases involving beast deaths and egregious violations.²⁶

Inquiry co-authored by PETA documented that, on average, animal experimenters and laboratory veterinarians comprise a combined 82 percent of the membership of IACUCs at leading U.S. institutions. A whopping 98.vi percent of the leadership of these IACUCs was also fabricated up of creature experimenters. The authors observed that the dominant function played by creature experimenters on these committees "may dilute input from the few IACUC members representing animal welfare and the full general public, contribute to previously-documented committee bias in favor of approving creature experiments and reduce the overall objectivity and effectiveness of the oversight arrangement."²⁷ Even when facilities are fully compliant with the law, animals who are covered can exist burned, shocked, poisoned, isolated, starved, forcibly restrained, addicted to drugs, and brain-damaged. No procedures or experiments, regardless of how trivial or painful they may be, are prohibited past federal law. When valid non-animal research methods are available, no federal police requires experimenters to use such methods instead of animals.

Alternatives to Animal Testing

A high-contour study published in the prestigious BMJ (formerly British Medical Journal) documenting the ineffectiveness and waste of experimentation on animals concluded that "if inquiry conducted on animals continues to exist unable to reasonably predict what can be expected in humans, the public'south continuing endorsement and funding of preclinical animal research seems misplaced."²⁸

Research with human volunteers, sophisticated computational methods, and in vitro studies based on human cells and tissues are critical to the advancement of medicine. Cutting-edge non-beast enquiry methods are available and have been shown time and again to exist more authentic than crude animal experiments.²⁹ However, this modern research requires a different outlook, 1 that is creative and compassionate and embraces the underlying philosophy of upstanding scientific discipline. Human health and well-being tin also exist promoted by adopting nonviolent methods of scientific investigation and concentrating on the prevention of disease before information technology occurs, through lifestyle modification and the prevention of further environmental pollution and degradation. The public is condign more enlightened and more vocal virtually the cruelty and inadequacy of the current inquiry arrangement and is demanding that tax dollars and charitable donations non be used to fund experiments on animals.

History of Animal Testing

PETA created "Without Consent"—an interactive timeline featuring almost 200 stories of animal experiments from the past century—to open up people'south eyes to the long history of suffering that's been inflicted on nonconsenting animals in laboratories and to claiming people to rethink this exploitation. Visit "Without Consent" to learn more than about harrowing brute experiments throughout history and how you can help create a ameliorate future for living, feeling beings.

Without Consent

Yous Can Help End Animal Testing

Virtually all federally funded enquiry is paid for with your revenue enhancement dollars. Your lawmakers needs to know that y'all don't want your coin used to pay for animal experiments.

Urge your members of Congress to endorse PETA's Research Modernization Deal, which provides a roadmap for modernizing U.S. investment in inquiry by ending funding for useless experiments on animals and investing in effective enquiry that's relevant to humans.

Take Action

Not a U.S. Resident? Accept Activity Here

Animate being Testing Facts and Figures

United States (2019)^1,2

• Well-nigh 1 million animals are held captive in laboratories or used in experiments (excluding rats, mice, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and agricultural animals used in agricultural experiments), plus an estimated 100 1000000 mice and rats

Canada (2020)ⁱⁱⁱ

• v.07 one thousand thousand animals used in experiments
• 94,543 animals subjected to "severe pain near, at, or higher up the hurting tolerance threshold of unanesthetized witting animals"

United kingdom(2020)⁴

• 2.88 million procedures on animals
• Of the 1.4 1000000 experiments completed in 2020, 57,600 were assessed equally "astringent," including "long-term disease processes where help with normal activities such equally feeding and drinking are required or where pregnant deficits in behaviours/activities persist."

References

^aneAnimal and Establish Health Inspection Service, U.Southward. Section of Agriculture, "Annual Report Creature Usage by Fiscal Year: Full Number of Animals Research Facilities Used in Regulated Activities (Column B)" and "Annual Report Brute Usage past Fiscal Year: Total Number of Animals Inquiry Facilities used in Regulated Activities (Cavalcade F)," 27 April. 2021.
²Madhusree Mukerjee, "Speaking for the Animals: A Veterinarian Analyzes the Turf Battles That Have Transformed the Animal Laboratory," Scientific American, Aug. 2004.
³Canadian Council on Brute Care,"CCAC 2020 Fauna Data Report," 2021
^iv U.K. Regime, "Annual Statistics of Scientific Procedures on Living Animals, Peachy Britain 2020," Abode Office, 15 July 2021.
⁵Cary Funk and 1000000 Hefferon, "Most Americans Accept Genetic Technology of Animals That Benefits Human Health, but Many Oppose Other Uses," Pew Inquiry Center, xvi Aug. 2018
^sixPeter Aldhous and Andy Coghlan, "Permit the People Speak," New Scientist 22 May 1999.
⁷Daniel G. Hackam, M.D., and Donald A. Redelmeier, M.D., "Translation of Research Evidence From Animals to Human being," The Journal of the American Medical Clan 296 (2006): 1731-two.
^viiiMarlene Simmons et al., "Cancer-Cure Story Raises New Questions," Los Angeles Times half dozen May 1998.
⁹Rich McManus, "Ex-Director Zerhouni Surveys Value of NIH Research," NIH Tape 21 June 2013.
^tenJarrod Bailey, "An Cess of the Role of Chimpanzees in AIDS Vaccine Research," Alternatives to Laboratory Animals 36 (2008): 381-428.
¹¹Steve Connor and Chris Green, "Is It Time to Surrender the Search for an AIDS Vaccine?" The Contained 24 April. 2008.
¹²National Institutes of Health, "Near New Therapeutic Uses," National Eye for Advancing Translational Sciences ix October. 2019.
¹³Steve Woloshin, K.D., Thousand.South., et al., "Press Releases by Academic Medical Centers: Not So Academic?" Annals of Internal Medicine 150 (2009): 613-eight.
¹⁴Steven Woloshin and Lisa Schwartz, "Media Reporting on Research Presented at Scientific Meetings: More Caution Needed," The Medical Journal of Commonwealth of australia 184 (2006): 576-80.
¹⁵Diana E. Pankevich et al., "International Creature Research Regulations: Impact on Neuroscience Research," The National Academies (2012).
^xviNational Institutes of Wellness, "Budget," (last accessed on 3 May 2021).
¹⁷Pankevich et al.
^eighteenDeborah Ziff, "On Campus: PETA Sues UW Over Access to Research Records," Wisconsin Land Journal 5 April. 2010.
¹⁹U.South. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, "Animal Welfare, Definition of Creature," Federal Register, 69 (2004): 31513-4.
²⁰Justin Goodman et al., "Trends in Fauna Use at U.s. Research Facilities," Periodical of Medical Ethics 0(2015): 1-3.
²¹The Associated Printing, "Creature Welfare Act May Not Protect All Critters," 7 May 2002.
²²U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animate being and Establish Health Inspection Service, "Fauna Care: Search."
²³U.Southward. Department of Agronomics, Office of Inspector General, "APHIS Brute Care Program, Inspection and Enforcement Activities," audit report, 30 Sept. 2005.
²⁴U.S. Department of Agriculture, Brute and Plant Health Inspection Service, "USDA Employee Survey on the Effectiveness of IACUC Regulations," Apr. 2000.
²⁵U.S. Section of Agriculture, Office of Inspector General, "APHIS Animal Care Program, Inspection and Enforcement Activities," inspect study, 30 Sept. 2005.
²⁶U.Southward. Department of Agronomics, Office of Inspector Full general, "Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Oversight of Research Facilities," audit written report, December. 2014.
²⁷Lawrence A. Hansen et al., "Assay of Brute Research Ethics Committee Membership at American Institutions," Animals 2 (2012): 68-75.
²⁸Pandora Pound and Michael Bracken, "Is Animal Enquiry Sufficiently Show Based To Exist A Cornerstone of Biomedical Inquiry?," BMJ (2014): 348.
²⁹Junhee Seok et al., "Genomic Responses in Mouse Models Poorly Mimic Human Inflammatory Diseases," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 110 (2013): 3507-12.

Source: https://www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-experimentation/animals-used-experimentation-factsheets/animal-experiments-overview/

Posted by: harvardwithereas1986.blogspot.com

Share this post