Animal experiments failing to protect people - discuss

Discussion in 'Soap Box' started by me1, Jul 3, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. me1

    me1 Well-Known Member

    http://www.curedisease.net/

    "Six young men at Northwick Park hospital were nearly killed by a drug which they were given because it had been ‘proved safe’ in monkeys
    Arthritis drug Vioxx – the greatest drug catastrophe in history – killed up to 140,000 people after being ‘proved safe’ in animals, including monkeys
    92% of new drugs successful in animal studies go on to fail in clinical trials, as at Northwick Park – sometimes injuring or killing volunteers and patients
    Extensive studies of animal tests’ ability to predict drugs’ and chemicals’ potential to cause cancer and birth defects have found them to be ineffective
    Scientists are increasingly lamenting the failings of animal studies. Cancer Research UK acknowledges: ‘We do trials in people because animal models do not predict what will happen in humans’. See more quotes here "
     
  2. Issaccs

    Issaccs Well-Known Member

    Meh, The animal testing is their to give a rough estimate, I imagine the effects would be much worse if they skipped the animal testing phase and went straight to humans.
     
  3. me1

    me1 Well-Known Member



    What do you base this 'imagined' scenario upon? Does not the fact that 92% of drugs that were found to be safe and effective in animal 'models' go on to fail to be safe or effective in humans prove that animal experiments cannot tell us about, or protect, humans and are therefore a waste of time?
     
  4. Issaccs

    Issaccs Well-Known Member

    Nope, that 8% makes it worth it.
     
  5. me1

    me1 Well-Known Member


    The fact that 92% of drugs that have passed safety and efficacy tests in animals then go to fail in humans proves that animal experiments are a complete waste of time. If by chance a drug works the same way in humans as it does in animals it is only known retrospectively so animal experiments cannot tell us anything. Tossing a coin, the predictive power of chance, gives a 50% success-rate.
     
  6. Issaccs

    Issaccs Well-Known Member

    But they can tell us something. If a drug has unreasonable negative side effects on an animal then you can fail it straight away before you go and give it to a human. It doesn't matter the drugs prove to be ineffective in humans either, you've tried, you can cross that off and move on to the next experiment.
    Its not worthcanceling all drug treatment because "animal testing is a waste of time" and you have no better way to test it because theres not nearly enough human volunteers to take completely theoretical drugs that havn't even been checked for simple things like, for example, massive internal bleeding in mice.
     
  7. me1

    me1 Well-Known Member

    Animals do not respond in a uniform fashion to the same substances. What is 'unsafe' for one species in even tiny amounts, can be perfectly safe for another in large doses. Arsenic, a human poison is well tolerated in sheep in large quantities. Aspirin, the most commonly used human drug is highly toxic to cats. Would you not use aspirin on the grounds that it is so toxic to cats, or eat arsenic because sheep 'tell us' it is 'safe'? As one can never know beforehand which 'intact-system'* is immitating the human response to a particular substance, they cannot tell us anything. Using them is dangerously misleading to humans, hence the 92% failure rate of drugs that pass safety and efficacy tests in animals.


    http://vivisection-absurd.org.uk/facts.html


    There are many, many scientific methods that can be employed before human clinical-trials, such as micro-dosing. A list can be obtained on the curedisease website i originally linked. But even if there were not, a useless methodology can be removed purely on the grounds of its own inherant uselessness irrelevant of whether or not there is 'something else'.


    *a favourite buzz-term used by vivisectors in defence of their work.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.