Dodaj nową odpowiedź

Doświadczenia na zwierzętach są prowadzone nie dla nauki, ale z powodu uwarunkowań prawnych.
Często jest rzeczą bezsensowną przypisywanie tym doświadczeniom jakiejkolwiek wartości naukowej dla człowieka,
a więc może to oznaczać, ze całość naszych badań na tym polu nie ma sensu.

Dr James D. Gallagher,
Kier. Wydziału Badań Medycznych Lederle-Laboratorian,
"Journal of the America Medical Association", 14 marca 1964

Wiwisekcja jest dla studiów medycznych bezużyteczna. Jest ona również bezużyteczna dla studiów fizjologii, ponieważ to, co dzisiaj wiemy o funkcjach organów, pochodzi z badań klinicznych i praktyki leczenia chorych. To w klinice a nie w laboratorium nauczyliśmy się jaką fizjologiczną rolę odgrywają poszczególne organy w ciele ludzkim.

Dr Paquet, "New York Herald Tribune", 20 marca 1904

Testowanie leków na zwierzętach, mimo swojej naukowej wartości, pozostaje całkiem bezowocne jeżeli chodzi o lecznictwo. Dzisiejsi lekarze nie są ani o włos lepiej uzbrojeni przeciwko chorobom od swoich kolegów sprzed 50 lat.
Prof. Felix von Niemeyer, Podręcznik praktycznej medycyny, wyd. 7

nie będę przytaczał więcej z tego co powiedzieli ludzie którzy byli samymi wiwisektorami odnośnie pracy jak i wiwisekcji.

Ile to pracuje sie nad lekarstwem, które to miało przynieść ulgę tysiącom ludzi i doprowadzić do wyleczenia. Ciągle zostaje tylko nadzieja dla chorych na raka i ich rodzin na to ze ten lek pomoże a le nie robi tego.
A niby jak ma to zrobić, jeżeli medycyna jest na tak niskim poziomie i trzyma sie twardo reguły organizm ludzki = organizmowi zwierzęcemu.
to porównanie zostawię bez komentarza.
zjeb powiedział
A teraz pomyślcie co stałoby się, gdyby przeskoczyć etap doświadczeń na zwierzętach... nie bedziemy o tym myslec bo farmazony prawisz każdego roku 100 tysięcy ludzi w samym uk umiera z powodów wiwisekcji. To ze komuś uda sie wyleczyć z cieżkiej i nieuleczalnej choroby można nazwać cudem, kiedy używa leków. Wystarczy popatrzeć na statystyki pacjentów onkologii . organizacja who pokazała ile leków jest potrzebnych człowiekowi, aby leczyć jego choroby, to co sie dzieje to czysty bizness. Ile jest aptek, które jak grzyby po deszczu stawiane są w Polsce, na to co koncerny robią z lekarzami fundując im zagraniczne wycieczki. Za to aby wypisywali ich leki. kto myśli o człowieku jak o swoim bracie czy siostrze, kto widzi w zwierzęciu mieszkańca tej Ziemi.
dobra medycyna skuteczna i prawdziwie medyczna odważy sie na to. lekarze którzy widza w swoim zawodzie pomaganie ludziom, a nie kariery i obiecane pieniądze.
ja nie muszę wybierać, ja wiem co chcę - jak i wiele osób, które też to wiedzą.

Superior non-animal methods

Many scientifically reliable research methods exist which are superior to using animals to learn about human disease or predict the safety of new drugs:

Microdosing – a new method of obtaining human metabolism data, which enables potential new drugs to be tested safely in humans at an earlier stage. Microdosing relies on the ultrasensitivity of Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (AMS), one of the most sensitive measuring devices ever invented. Using AMS it is possible to conduct a full human metabolism study after administration of as little as 0.1 milligram of drug substance, measuring drug concentrations in biological fluids up to 1000 times less than the levels one would observe in a classical Phase I clinical study. This should be part of ‘Phase 0’ pre-clinical trials for every drug, instead of animal testing. Currently, preclinical studies take up to 18 months and cost €2.3-3.8m. Microdosing could reduce the time to four to six months and the cost to €0.26m per new molecule. Its accuracy at predicting human metabolism is unsurpassed. EU and US regulators have endorsed the use of microdosing to speed and improve the safety of drug development. See www.xceleron.co.uk, www.microdosing.co.uk

DNA chips – enable the study of pharmacogenetics, which, in turn, enables the practice of personalised medicine. This is the concept that since each person is genetically unique, medicines should be designed for individuals, rather than our current ‘one drug fits all’ approach. DNA chips are computer wafers with tiny wells where human genes can be exposed to a new drug, for instance. The computer then reads which genes are turned on or off (or up or down) by the experimental drug. See, for example, www.simugen.co.uk

Microfluidics chips – again just 2cm wide, have etched into them a series of tiny chambers, each containing a sample of tissue from different parts of the body. The compartments are linked by microchannels through which a blood substitute flows. The test drug is added to the blood substitute and circulates around the device; thus mimicking what goes on in the body on a micro scale. Sensors in the chip feed back information for computer analysis. Hurel (Human relevant) are pioneering this field: see www.hurelcorp.com

Human tissue – all that we know about HIV/AIDS has come from studying humans and human tissue; particularly blood. Similarly, everything we know about Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s diseases has been learned by studying patients and their tissues. According toDr. John Xuereb, Director of the Cambridge Brain Bank and Wolfson Brain Imaging Centre; “Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and other neurodegenerative diseases occur in humans and it is in human tissue that we will find the answers to these diseases.” New drugs can be tested in human tissues, ethically obtained with fully informed consent, before they are given to volunteers in microdose studies. Companies such as Asterand work exclusively with human tissue because it is more appropriate than animal tissue: see www.asterand.com, www.biopta.com

Computer modelling – virtual human organs and virtual metabolism programmes can now predict drug effects in humans far more accurately than animals can. Computers can be used to design the molecular structure of drugs to target specific receptors. For example, the protease inhibitors for patients with HIV were designed by computer and tested in human tissue cultures and computer models, bypassing animal tests because of the urgent need. In 1997, Roche Pharmaceuticals had a new heart drug approved on the strength of data from a virtual heart because the animal data was inconclusive. Research teams around the world are working on a 'virtual human', which is designed to predict drug metabolism and metabolite interaction with any given organ - information that animal models will never be able to provide. Scientists can simulate experiments in silico (in computer) that could take months or years to do in the lab or clinic. See www.entelos.com, www.physiome.org

Autopsies – though neglected of late for a number of reasons, post mortem studies remain the best method of studying the effects of a disease on the whole body.

Epidemiology – studies lifestyle factors in populations to find commonalities that might be significant. Epidemiology linked smoking to cancer and high cholesterol to heart disease, folic acid deficiency in pregnancy to spina bifida and many more associations. See www.ukbiobank.ac.uk

Stem cell research – offers potential promise of treatment for a wide variety of diseases. Human stem cells have already been used successfully to treat some leukaemias, as well as improving outcomes for heart attack patients and for some patients suffering from Parkinson’s disease.

New imaging technologies – such as Magnetoencephalography (MEG), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), functional MRI (fMRI), magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS), positron emission tomography (PET), single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), event-related optical signals (EROS), transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and others are offering a view of the human body – in particular, the brain – that cannot be gained by studying animals.

Post-Marketing Drug Surveillance – if enforced, would ensure that unexpected side effects of new drugs would be identified much sooner; thus reducing the burden of adverse drug reactions: currently our 4th leading cause of death.

Clinical research – has been and will remain the sine qua non of medical practice.
Many medical treatments have never been studied for efficacy. Large clinical studies are needed to establish whether current practice is actually the best, evidence-based option.

Prevention – is always more effective than cure. It is estimated that 80% of all cancers and heart disease – our two biggest killers – could be prevented. Funding further research into establishing preventive factors would be money well spent.

Testing drugs and chemicals on animals does not offer even a 50% likelihood of predicting their effects in humans. Likewise, researching human disease using animals is misleading and results in human harm, including death. Replacing the animal model is not about finding a one-to-one replacement for every current use of animals: that would be futile since the way animals are currently used is ineffective. We need to use research techniques that are genuinely effective; such as those described above. Only by devoting our resources to human specific research can we be confident that we are doing our utmost to ease human suffering from disease.

link

link