alternatives for animal testing
Makeup
Alternatives to animal testing
Jump to:navigation, searchMost scientists and governments say they agree that animal testing should cause as little suffering as possible, and that alternatives to animal testing need to be developed. The "three Rs", first described by Russell and Burch in 1959, are guiding principles for the use of animals in research in many countries:
- Replacement refers to the preferred use of non-animal methods over animal methods whenever it is possible to achieve the same scientific aim.
- Reduction refers to methods that enable researchers to obtain comparable levels of information from fewer animals, or to obtain more information from the same number of animals.
- Refinement refers to methods that alleviate or minimize potential pain, suffering or distress, and enhance animal welfare for the animals still used.
Two major alternatives to in vivo animal testing are in vitro cell culture techniques and in silico computer simulation. However, some claim they are not true alternatives since simulations use data from prior animal experiments and cultured cells often require animal derived products, such as serum. Others say that they cannot replace animals completely as they are unlikely to ever provide enough information about the complex interactions of living systems. Other alternatives, not subject to this criticism, involve the use of humans for skin irritancy tests and donated human blood for pyrogenicity studies. Another alternative is so-called microdosing, in which the basic behaviour of drugs is assessed using human volunteers receiving doses well below those expected to produce whole-body effects.
Origin
In 1954, Charles Hume, founder of the Universities Federation for Animal Welfare (UFAW) made an original proposal for the Three Rs to the UFAW to take in consideration alternatives for animal testing and change scientific study in laboratory animal experiments. Committee under the chairmanship of Sir Peter Medawar, the Nobel prize-winning immunologist, along with Christine Stevens, founder of the Animal Welfare Institute (AWI) in the U.S, and William Lane-Petter, the Secretary of the Research Defense Society of Great Britain provided financial support and managed the project to publish the concept of animal testing alternatives. The microbiologist R.L. Burch and the zoologist W.M.S. Russell were chosen to publish the work. "The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique" was published in London in 1959, and the book defined animal testing alternatives as “The Three R's: Refinement, Reduction, and Replacement.”
Types
About this entry
You’re currently reading “alternatives for animal testing”, an entry on CK Perfumes
- Published:
- 19.07.10 / 3am
- Category:
- alternatives for animal testing
















