How Many Animals Die A Year As Result Of Animal Experimentation

Each year, more than 100 million 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 preparation, curiosity-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 accept holes drilled into their skulls, and others take their skin burned off or their spinal cords crushed. In add-on 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 aught more than disposable laboratory equipment.

Creature Experiments Are Wasteful and Unreliable

A Pew Inquiry Heart poll found that 52 percent of U.Due south. adults oppose the use of animals in scientific inquiry, and other surveys advise that the shrinking group that does accept beast experimentation does and then only because information technology believes information technology to be necessary for medical progress.^v,6 The bulk of animal experiments practise not contribute to improving man health, and the value of the office that fauna experimentation plays in most medical advances is questionable.

In an article 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 nigh extrapolating the finding of prominent beast research to the care of human disease … poor replication of fifty-fifty high-quality animal 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 human beings. And because animal species differ from ane another biologically in many significant ways, it becomes even more than unlikely that animal experiments volition yield results that volition be correctly interpreted and practical to the human condition in a meaningful style.

For example, according to former National Cancer Institute Director Dr. Richard Klausner, "Nosotros have cured mice of cancer for decades, and it just didn't work in humans."^viii This conclusion was echoed past former National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director Dr. Elias Zerhouni, who acknowledged that experimenting on animals has been a boondoggle. "We take moved abroad from studying human disease in humans," he said. "Nosotros all drank the Kool-Assist on that one, me included. … The problem is that it hasn't worked, and it's fourth dimension we stopped dancing around the problem. … Nosotros demand to refocus and arrange new methodologies for utilise in humans to understand disease biology in humans."⁹

The data is sobering: Although at least 85 HIV/AIDS vaccines have been successful in nonhuman primate studies, every bit of 2015, every one has failed to protect humans.¹⁰ In ane instance, an AIDS vaccine that was shown to be effective in monkeys failed in human clinical trials because information technology did non forbid people from developing AIDS, and some believe that it made them more susceptible to the disease. Co-ordinate to a study in the British newspaper The Independent, one decision from the failed study was that "testing HIV vaccines on monkeys earlier they are used on humans, does not in fact piece of work."¹¹

These are not anomalies. The National Institutes of Wellness has stated, "Therapeutic evolution is a costly, circuitous and fourth dimension-consuming process. The average length of time from target discovery to approval of a new drug is about fourteen years. The failure charge per unit during this process exceeds 95 percent, and the price per successful drug can be $ane billion or more."¹²

Research published in the journal Register 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 human health and do not provide key facts or acknowledge important limitations."^thirteen One study of media coverage of scientific meetings concluded that news stories often omit crucial data 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 not have prepare admission to information on the ineffectiveness of animal experimentation.

What'due south the hidden cost of beast experiments? Our augmented reality experience will show you.

Try Information technology At present

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 animal experimentation. One of the largest sources of funding comes from publicly funded regime granting agencies such as NIH. Approximately 47 per centum of NIH-funded research involves experimentation on animals, and in 2020, NIH budgeted nearly $42 billion for research and development.^15,16 In improver, many charities––including the March of Dimes, the American Cancer Society, and countless others—employ donations to fund experiments on animals. One-third of the projects funded past the National Multiple Sclerosis Society involve fauna experimentation.¹⁷

Despite the vast amount of public funds being used to underwrite animal experimentation, it is nearly incommunicable for the public to obtain current and consummate information regarding the creature experiments that are beingness carried out in their communities or funded with their tax dollars. State open-records laws and the U.S. Freedom of Information Act tin be used to obtain documents and data from state institutions, government agencies, and other federally funded facilities, but private companies, contract labs, and animal breeders are exempt. In many cases, institutions that are field of study to open-records laws fight vigorously to withhold information well-nigh animal experimentation from the public.¹⁸

Oversight and Regulation

Despite the endless animals killed each year in laboratories worldwide, nigh countries have grossly inadequate regulatory measures in place to protect animals from suffering and distress or to forbid them from existence used when a non-animal approach is readily available. In the U.Due south., the species most unremarkably 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 Deed (AWA).^19,xx Many laboratories that utilize only these species are non required by law to provide animals with pain relief or veterinary care, to search for and consider alternatives to beast use, to have an institutional commission review proposed experiments, or to be inspected past the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) or any other entity. Some estimates bespeak that every bit many as 800 U.Southward. laboratories are not subject to federal laws and inspections considering they experiment exclusively on mice, rats, and other animals whose employ is largely unregulated.²¹

As for the more than xi,000 facilities that the USDA does regulate (of which more than 1,200 are designated for "research"), only 120 USDA inspectors are employed to oversee their operations.²² Reports have repeatedly ended that even the minimal standards fix along by the AWA are not being met by these facilities, and institutionally based oversight bodies, chosen Institutional Fauna Care and Use Committees (IACUCs), have failed to carry out their mandate. A 1995 report by the USDA's Office of the Inspector General (OIG) "found that the activities of the IACUCs did non always meet the standards of the AWA. Some IACUCs did non 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 bug 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 "issues with the search for alternative 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 declining to comply with the minimal AWA standards and the USDA's weak enforcement actions failing to deter future violations. The audit highlighted that from 2009 to 2011, USDA inspectors cited 531 experimentation facilities for i,379 violations stemming from the IACUCs' failure to adequately review and monitor the utilise of animals. The audit also determined that in 2012, the USDA reduced its penalties to AWA violators by an average of 86 percent, even in cases involving animal 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 98.6 percentage of the leadership of these IACUCs was as well made up of animal experimenters. The authors observed that the ascendant function played by animal experimenters on these committees "may dilute input from the few IACUC members representing fauna welfare and the general public, contribute to previously-documented committee bias in favor of approving creature experiments and reduce the overall objectivity and effectiveness of the oversight system."²⁷ Even when facilities are fully compliant with the police, animals who are covered can be 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 exist, are prohibited past federal law. When valid non-brute research methods are available, no federal police force requires experimenters to apply such methods instead of animals.

Alternatives to Animal Testing

A high-profile report published in the prestigious BMJ (formerly British Medical Journal) documenting the ineffectiveness and waste of experimentation on animals concluded that "if research conducted on animals continues to be unable to reasonably predict what can be expected in humans, the public'southward 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 disquisitional to the advancement of medicine. Cutting-edge non-animal research methods are bachelor and have been shown time and once again to be more than accurate than crude creature experiments.²⁹ Even so, this modernistic research requires a different outlook, ane that is creative and empathetic and embraces the underlying philosophy of ethical science. Human wellness and well-being can also be promoted by adopting nonviolent methods of scientific investigation and concentrating on the prevention of affliction before it occurs, through lifestyle modification and the prevention of further environmental pollution and degradation. The public is becoming more aware and more vocal about the cruelty and inadequacy of the current enquiry system and is demanding that tax dollars and charitable donations not be used to fund experiments on animals.

History of Fauna Testing

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

Without Consent

You Can Help Terminate Beast Testing

Virtually all federally funded inquiry is paid for with your tax dollars. Your lawmakers needs to know that you don't desire your coin used to pay for animal experiments.

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

Take Action

Not a U.S. Resident? Take Action Here

Animal Testing Facts and Figures

U.s. (2019)^1,ii

• Nigh 1 million animals are held captive in laboratories or used in experiments (excluding rats, mice, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and agronomical animals used in agronomical experiments), plus an estimated 100 million mice and rats

Canada (2020)^three

• five.07 meg animals used in experiments
• 94,543 animals subjected to "severe pain near, at, or higher up the hurting tolerance threshold of unanesthetized conscious animals"

United Kingdom(2020)⁴

• two.88 one thousand thousand procedures on animals
• Of the 1.4 1000000 experiments completed in 2020, 57,600 were assessed every bit "severe," including "long-term affliction processes where aid with normal activities such as feeding and drinking are required or where significant deficits in behaviours/activities persist."

References

ⁱAnimal and Plant Health Inspection Service, U.South. Department of Agriculture, "Annual Report Creature Usage by Financial Yr: Total Number of Animals Enquiry Facilities Used in Regulated Activities (Column B)" and "Annual Written report Creature Usage by Fiscal Year: Total Number of Animals Research Facilities used in Regulated Activities (Column F)," 27 April. 2021.
²Madhusree Mukerjee, "Speaking for the Animals: A Veterinary Analyzes the Turf Battles That Have Transformed the Animal Laboratory," Scientific American, Aug. 2004.
³Canadian Council on Animal Care,"CCAC 2020 Animal Data Report," 2021
⁴ U.K. Authorities, "Almanac Statistics of Scientific Procedures on Living Animals, Britain 2020," Abode Role, 15 July 2021.
^fiveCary Funk and Meg Hefferon, "Most Americans Take Genetic Engineering of Animals That Benefits Human Wellness, but Many Oppose Other Uses," Pew Inquiry Center, sixteen Aug. 2018
⁶Peter Aldhous and Andy Coghlan, "Let the People Speak," New Scientist 22 May 1999.
^viiDaniel G. Hackam, M.D., and Donald A. Redelmeier, Thou.D., "Translation of Research Evidence From Animals to Human being," The Periodical of the American Medical Clan 296 (2006): 1731-2.
⁸Marlene Simmons et al., "Cancer-Cure Story Raises New Questions," Los Angeles Times 6 May 1998.
⁹Rich McManus, "Ex-Director Zerhouni Surveys Value of NIH Inquiry," NIH Record 21 June 2013.
¹⁰Jarrod Bailey, "An Assessment of the Part of Chimpanzees in AIDS Vaccine Enquiry," Alternatives to Laboratory Animals 36 (2008): 381-428.
¹¹Steve Connor and Chris Green, "Is It Fourth dimension to Requite Up the Search for an AIDS Vaccine?" The Independent 24 Apr. 2008.
¹²National Institutes of Health, "About New Therapeutic Uses," National Middle for Advancing Translational Sciences ix October. 2019.
¹³Steve Woloshin, M.D., M.S., et al., "Press Releases by Academic Medical Centers: Non And so Academic?" Annals of Internal Medicine 150 (2009): 613-8.
¹⁴Steven Woloshin and Lisa Schwartz, "Media Reporting on Enquiry Presented at Scientific Meetings: More Caution Needed," The Medical Journal of Australia 184 (2006): 576-80.
¹⁵Diana Eastward. Pankevich et afifty., "International Animal Research Regulations: Impact on Neuroscience Research," The National Academies (2012).
^sixteenNational Institutes of Health, "Budget," (last accessed on 3 May 2021).
¹⁷Pankevich et al.
¹⁸Deborah Ziff, "On Campus: PETA Sues UW Over Access to Research Records," Wisconsin Land Journal 5 Apr. 2010.
¹⁹U.S. Department of Agriculture, Beast and Plant Health Inspection Service, "Animal Welfare, Definition of Animate being," Federal Register, 69 (2004): 31513-4.
²⁰Justin Goodman et al., "Trends in Animate being Use at U.s.a. Inquiry Facilities," Journal of Medical Ethics 0(2015): 1-3.
²¹The Associated Press, "Animal Welfare Human action May Not Protect All Critters," seven May 2002.
²²U.Southward. Section of Agronomics, Beast and Plant Health Inspection Service, "Creature Care: Search."
²³U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of Inspector Full general, "APHIS Brute Care Program, Inspection and Enforcement Activities," audit report, 30 Sept. 2005.
²⁴U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, "USDA Employee Survey on the Effectiveness of IACUC Regulations," Apr. 2000.
²⁵U.Southward. Department of Agriculture, Part of Inspector General, "APHIS Animal Care Plan, Inspection and Enforcement Activities," audit report, xxx Sept. 2005.
²⁶U.South. Department of Agronomics, Function of Inspector General, "Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Oversight of Research Facilities," audit written report, Dec. 2014.
²⁷Lawrence A. Hansen et afifty., "Analysis of Animal Enquiry Ethics Committee Membership at American Institutions," Animals 2 (2012): 68-75.
²⁸Pandora Pound and Michael Bracken, "Is Beast Research Sufficiently Evidence Based To Be A Cornerstone of Biomedical Research?," 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: fullertonsulthen.blogspot.com

Share this post