AP Final

Jazmin VazquezWriting 39CAdvocacy Project FinalDr. WayMarch 7, 2015

A Computer Over the Life of an Innocent Animal

Throughout time we have been able to cure many deadly diseases. They have saved many lives due to the medicine and surgical procedures. Doctors and scientist use animals as research, to test many medicines and surgical procedures before applying it on a human. It makes some sore of sense that all this things are practiced on another living creature before it is done on actual humans. The only problem is that these experiments are hurting the animals. The animals are subjected to many cruel experiments. These experiments include things like poisoning for toxicity testing, damaging brain damage, testing out new drugs by infecting them with deadly diseases. Procedures like these cause: long-term social isolation, withholding of food, separating babies from their mothers and much more. The organization New England Anti-Vivisection Society states in there article, Harm and Suffering| Animals Use in Research, Many animal experiments utilize restraining devices Some research projects call for immobilization of specific parts of an animals body while other protocols involve immobilization of an animals entire body. Rats and mice have been put through protocols of immobilization by being placed in tubes. Later on they are electrically shocked to be put in water to see if they are able to keep themselves from drowning. This research or type of testing is used as a stress experiments. The researches that conduct experiments like this say, these experiments had relevance to human anxiety and depression. (neavs) No human or animal should be kept in hostility without moving for an extended period of time. Not only are these rats and mice kept without moving but also they are kept without food. There is no form of feeding these creatures if they are inserted in tubes. Animal testing has gone far with the procedures they place animals in.Another area that is very dangerous and causes a lot of the suffering of animals is genetic engineering and xenotransplantation. These are the surgical procedures in which tissue, cells, or organs are transplanted. NEAVS says, Many of these animals die, while suffering from abnormalities and other diseased conditions. These animals are many times weak and unable to adapt to whatever is being done to them. Genetic engineering takes over the animals body by trying to create specific traits in the animal. We were all given certain traits and genetic forms and these should not be changed. Researchers are forcing these animals to adapt to something they were not born with. Figure 1 This is a picture that shows the rats in the tubes that they are placed in to be immobilized. (elizabethely.com)

Pain is not the only thing these animals are going through they are also going through severe stress. The reason for this stress that these animals are going through is for the living conditions they are going through. They spend their lives in barren cages, unable to make choices or express natural behaviors. Most never experience fresh air or sunshine, only bars and concrete, say the organization neavs. This type of lifestyle is not for these animals. Each animal is different and each one of them has their own type of environment. Some of these animals face stress by seeing other animals going through stress for example mice. In 2009 there was a case of monkeys that were going through chronic psychological distress. These monkeys we can say were going crazy. They were spinning around, ripping out their hair, and biting their own wounds. The correct term for this type of stress is stress-induced psychosis. Just the fact that these animals are living in such conditions is enough suffering by itself already. Then adding the suffering of the actual lab protocols. These animals are in these labs for short or long periods of time. Think about the suffering not just physically but mentally they go through.Is the pain of these animals even worth it? The suffering of these animals is being taken vain. Many research experiments done that have been done have had inaccurate results. Which means that these animals are put through all these protocols and at the end of the day the experiments is not giving out the results researchers are expecting. According to the Humane Society International, data show that animal studies fail to predict real human outcomes in 50 to 99.7 percent of cases. The reason for this is because animals and humans do not process everything the same. Nutrition is an area that has caused many inaccurate results. There is a huge physiological difference between species. For example it is said that vitamin C helps to prevent cancer. Mice can synthesize the vitamin while us humans cant. NEAVS said, Because of this species difference, rats are not an appropriate human model for studying the effects of fats. Although over 95% of our genome is similar to mice there are many differences we both have. With these differences, results will continue to be inaccurate and these animals will be going through unnecessary procedures. Another experiment animals are used for has been to create brain damage. Creating this brain damage stimulates the effects of a human stroke. (An Examination of Animal Experiments) The next protocol is to test out drugs to see if they can reduce the brain damage that was done. the American Heart Association in January 1990, reported that, of 25 different treatments that worked in rodents, not a single one worked in human patients, says the physicians committee in their An Examination of Animal Experiments Article. When brain damage is created the animal will not go back to its original brain form. Which means that they will have to live the rest of their lives with an abnormal brain. Figure 2: This is a figure in which you see how the mouses head looks after a brain damage protocol. (forschung3r.ch)

There is a saying that says, There is a light at the end of the tunnel For these animals there is hope of other alternatives besides their lives. But before talking about these alternatives we must discuss the three Rs. During the 1950, two scientist (William Russell and Rex Burch) publicized a manuscript in which they talked about the need for scientist to do their work based on the principles of the three Rs. (Animal Experimentation A Guide to the Issues) What are these three Rs? Well, these Rs Stand for replace, reduce, and refine. With these three Rs we are able to replace a procedure that uses animals with one that does not. We are also able to reduce the number of animals used in a procedure and refine a procedure to minimize potential animal pain. (Alternative to Animal Tests: The Humane Society of the United States) In the United States about 26 million animals are used in testing every year. If these three Rs were taken into account the lives of many animals would be changed. The three Rs come hand in hand with the alternatives. The purpose of the alternatives is to achieve at least one R. With at least one R being done we are a step closer to ending animal testing. Now a days technology has advanced very much. As time progresses technology just keeps getting better and better. Scientists have now come up with different ways to test diseases and other things. They have come up with methods that will replace animals and use technology for these tests. The 4 most known alternatives for animal testing are: in vitro testing, computer-modeling, studies with human volunteers, and human-patient simulators. In vitro testing is testing that can be done in a test tube. In these test tubes researchers grow tissue or cells instead of doing it inside of an animal. Computer-modeling is testing that is done though a computer. These computers simulate human biology and the progress of diseases. (PETA) The human volunteer alternative is just the use of humans. These volunteers are given a small dose of a drug that is being tested while they are being monitored to see how the body reacts. The last alternative is the use of a human-patient simulator that mimics for example injuries. These human-patient stimulators are almost like you have a real human in front of you. The plus side to these alternatives is that, not only will animals be kept safe but also that these methods are not hindered by species differences. Which means it will not be impossible to apply the test results of an animal to a human. Alternatives like these take less time to show results and cost less money to carry on. Figure 3: This image shows what an in vitro procedure of cells looks like. (rsc.org)There are many reasons why the alternatives are a better pick for everyone. Who does not like to save money? All of the alternatives I just mentioned above cost extremely less than performing animal testing. Many school administrators often say that the reason why they dont implement these alternatives in their schools is because of the cost. In reality research shows that is costs more the dissection of an animal than buying one of these alternatives. According to the Humane Society Press, Depending on numbers need. The initial cost of computer programs three-dimensional models may or may not be higher than a shipment of preserved animals specimens, but the alternatives can be used repeatedly, while the specimens must be replaced after a single use. (The use of Animals in Higher Education) The alternatives not only save the lifes of many animals but they also save money and are good to be reused many times. A computer lasts many years as well as a human-patient stimulator.

Figure 4: The table shows the cost differences between alternatives and dissection of animals. (The use of Animals in Higher Education)The book Innovative Strategies in Tissue Engineering said, In vitro methods are faster and most cost effective compared to animal experimentationApart from being simply cost effective alternative to animal trials is allows for studies of specific cell interactions with bioactive factors that would be possible in whole animals due to the presence of often confounding systemic effects. Each alternative has its good side to it. According to a review article titled, Basic Research: Issues with Animal Experimentation, In vivo studies using the animals are helpful in developing the treatment strategies as they are important link between the successful in vitro testing and safe human use. We see that these 2 prints show us how effective this in vitro project is. By replacing animal testing with this type of alternative researchers are able to manipulate cells and tissues without having to worry about the animals difference in genome from us. The alternatives are being effective and showing better results than animal experimentation. The Computer modeling is a great use because according to the Indian Journal of Pharmacology, the use of computer models is more effective than the use of animals for the lapse time. the protease inhibitors for patients with HIV were designed by computer and tested in human tissue cultures and computer models, bypassing animal tests due to the urgent need for a treatment, is the example they give in their article. Time is a very important factor when you are trying to find a cure for something like HIV. The replacement of animals with computer-based alternatives has begun worldwide; so far Spain is at 73%. PETA says in their article of Alternatives to Animal Testing, computer models that simulate human biology and the progression of developing diseases. Studies show that these models can accurately predict the ways that new drugs will react in the human body and replace the use of animals in exploratory research and many standard drug tests. All of these articles show us how much more effective computer-based alternatives are over testing with animals. The next alternative is human volunteers. What these volunteers go through is not harming to them. The amount of drug dose they are given is fairly small and they are monitored throughout the entire research. The specific term for this time of alternative is microdosing. Besides it replacing animal testing this testing helps to screen out drug compounds that necessarily will not work on humans. Which is great because this means that the government will not require for the drug to be testing on an animal. Another animal experimentation that can be replaced with human volunteers is archaic experiments. This experimentation has been replaced with fMRI (functional magnetic resonance imaging), which allows researchers to study the human brain very closely without hurting the human at all. Max Planck Institution for Biological Cybernetics says, The main advantages of fMRI lie in its non-invasive nature, ever-increasing availability, relatively high spatiotemporal resolution, and its capacity to demonstrate the entire network of brain areas engaged when subjects perform particular tasks. The brain is a very important part of our body that should be studied deeply and carefully. We see that there is no need to hurt animals and cause brain damage when there is the alternative to just place a human in an MRI. Lastly, a great alternative that can replace and reduce the use of animals in testing is the human-patient stimulator. PETA says that, systems like TraumaManwhich replicates a breathing, bleeding human torso and has realistic layers of skin and tissue, ribs, and internal organsare widely used to teach emergency surgical procedures and have been shown in numerous studies to impart lifesaving skills better than courses that require students to cut into live pigs, goats, or dogs. There really is not a reason why animal testing should continue when we have all these wonderful options that can be used.

Figure 5: This image shows the inside of a human-patient stimulator. A surgical procedure is being done. (celebstyle.co)Till what extent should the suffering of these animals be taken into consideration? Although most animals and us used in experimentation (monkeys) are primates doesnt mean we are the same. The opposition side belief that the best way to be sure a drug or vaccine works is to test on an animal before a human. Genetic modification has been a big issue and controversy. A review article (Public Attitudes toward Animal Research: A Review) stated, a more recent study by Macnaghten [89] shows an emerging concern from the public about the increase in the numbers of animals used in research due to the currently inefficient and unpredictable nature of the genetic modification process. By modifying these animals we are forcing change in nature. We have to think about what nature can do if these changes are done to these animals. What happens when an animal is genetically modified and then is put to create babies? Yes research is very important because there are always sicknesses and diseases going around but we have to think about the consequences outside of the box. Animals were created a certain way the same way we were made different from them. These alternatives will continue to better and someday be fully developed to stop animal testing. Validation is something important to take into account when it comes to these alternatives and should be seen as a progress when it comes to replacing animal testing. (Replacement of animal procedures: alternatives in research, education and testing)

Sources"About Animal Testing : Humane Society International." RSS. Humane Society International. Web. 1 Mar. 2015. .

"Alternative Methods." Alternative Methods. Max Planck Institution for Biological Cybernetics. Web. 1 Mar. 2015. .

"Alternatives to Animal Testing." PETA. Web. 1 Mar. 2015. .

"Alternatives to Animal Tests : The Humane Society of the United States." RSS. The Humane Society of The United States. Web. 1 Mar. 2015. .

"An Examination of Animal Experiments." PCRM.org. Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine. Web. 1 Mar. 2015. .

"Animal Testing - ProCon.org." ProConorg Headlines. ProCon. Web. 1 Mar. 2015. .

Badyal, Dinesh K., and Chetna Desai. Animal Use in Pharmacology Education andResearch: The Changing Scenario. Vol. 46. IndianJournal of Pharmacology,2014. Print.Balcombe, Jonathan P. "The Use of Animals in Higher Education: Problems, Alternatives, and Recommendations." The Use of Animals in Higher Education: Problems, Alternatives, and Recommendations. Humane Society Press. Web. 1 Mar. 2015. .

Balls, Micheal. "Replacement of Animal Procedures: Alternatives in Research, Education and Testing." Laboratory Animals. Environment Institute, 1994. 193-211. Print.

"Harm and Suffering | Animal Use in Research." Harm and Suffering | Animal Use in Research. Neavs. Web. 1 Mar. 2015. .

Ormandy, Elisabeth H, and Catherine A Schuppli. "Public Attitudes toward Animal Research: A Review." Animals. MDPI, 2014. 391-408. PrintPublishers, River, and Niels Jernes. "Animals Models and In Vitro Alternatives: In Regenerative Medicine: Focus on Biomaterials Development." Innovative Strategies in Tissue Engineering. River, 2015. Print.

Saraf, Shyam K, and Vinay Kumaraswamy. "Basic Research: Issues with Animal Experimentations." Indian Journal of Orthopedics. Vol. 47. 2013. 6-9. Print.