Science depends on animal testing. But the work comes at a steep, hidden cost

[A_User]

All of these studies are pretty much worthless as well, based on translation rates to humans

The harrowing lives of animal researchers

1000 drugs have shown promise for neuroprotection in animals... none worked in humans

Empirical evidence regarding the predictive value of animal models comes in the form of research amenable to quantification via table ​table11 and examples of multiple failures over many years in the same subject. Examples of the latter would include the search for a vaccine against HIV and neuroprotective drugs. Approximately 100 vaccines have been shown effective against an HIV-like virus in animal models, however, none have prevented HIV in humans 67, 68. Even if an HIV vaccine came from animal-based research tomorrow, the animal model per se would not be predictive for humans as the PPV would be somewhere in the 0.01 area. Likewise, up to one-thousand drugs have been shown effective for neuroprotection in animal models but none have been effective for humans 23-25, 29, 38, 61, 69-71. The predictive value is again minimal even if a successful drug is currently in development. The animal model has failed as a modality for predicting neuroprotection. Along the same lines, of twenty t…

[A_User]

There’s no way further animal testing is a good thing, it’s barbaric, and needs to stop. It also affects the human researchers and labworkers.

I can’t find the X thread but long ago someone compiled the massive amounts of threads on reddit from labworkers having nightmares and affected by the work they’re doing.

AI, in-silico, in-vitro medicine, validated pathways in MR studies, these are good enough. These useless animal experiments are not.

" Students interested in STEM should probably know that if you create an anonymous forum for biologists, you get constant posts from people having existential crises over being pressured into mass mouse murder " https://x.com/invitrofuture/status/1830093094399648026