• MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Would be more apt if animals’ physiology was even remotely similar to humans though. Test environments in programming can at least be exact replicas of production environments.

      • usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        5 hours ago

        But but it worked on my machine

        In 2004, the FDA estimated that 92 percent of drugs that pass preclinical tests, including “pivotal” animal tests, fail to proceed to the market.More recent analysis suggests that, despite efforts to improve the predictability of animal testing, the failure rate has actually increased and is now closer to 96 percent

        https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4594046/

        • Telorand@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          4 hours ago

          That’s actually really good to hear. It really sucks that the animal component is almost pointless, and it seems to be more unethical to include them in the testing process, but it’s good to hear that at least the safety guardrails were working in the past.

          Seems we just need to rethink how to ethically test on humans from the start, though I worry about letting the current people in charge execute that plan.

          • usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            4 hours ago

            The good news is that some progress has been made in the US. The semi-recent (2022) FDA modernization act 2.0 removes mandates for animal testing in law and allows other testing methods to be used instead

            There’s another bill (FDA modernization act 3.0) that was just reintroduced a few days ago to not just allow the FDA to use non-animal testing, but to require that the FDA start actually working to allow it and setup pathways, rules, requirements, etc. And prioritize the review of drugs done via approved non-animal testing

            It includes various reporting, safety, etc. requirements laid out so it wouldn’t just be handing it blindly to the current admin

            The 2.0 act was suprisingly bipartisan, so it’s not a given that the 3.0 act would be doomed. Call your house representative and senators to make sure it gets through!

        • MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          5 hours ago

          There’s actual medication that was tested on animals that was completely fine then when it got approved it was given to human women and caused crazy amounts of miscarriages. Different species are not comparable when it comes to medication, testing on animals is almost completely pointless.

        • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          5 hours ago

          It sometimes feels as if the medical and scientific knowledge of people who are hardline against animal testing at all is exactly that and only that thinking, yes.