A paradigm shift for animal tests

Even in an era of intense political polarisation, there are still moments when a bipartisan consensus can emerge around important ethical issues.

- PETER SINGER SANKALPA GHOSE

One such moment is happening now. Last April, the United States Food and Drug Administration released its “Roadmap to Reducing Animal Testing in Preclinical Safety Studies”. The FDA said that it was taking “a groundbreaking step” that would advance public health and limit wasteful expenditure by replacing animal testing with “more effective, human-relevant methods”.

Such a step would, of course, reduce the suffering of millions of nonhuman animals used for tests. Echoing what opponents of the use of animals in drug testing have long been saying, the FDA referred to a “growing scientific recognition that animals do not provide adequate models of human health and disease. The roadmap also noted that more than 90% of drugs that appear safe and effective in animals do not receive FDA approval for use in humans because they are not safe and effective in humans.

Two weeks after the FDA announcement, the US National Institutes of Health (NIH), the world’s largest funder of biomedical research, added its support for the shift away from animals, announcing a new commitment: to give higher priority to “human-based research technologies” and to reduce the use of animals in the research that it funds. NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya said that integrating data science and technology would “fundamentally reimagine the way research is conducted”, and by doing so, speed up innovation and improve the outcomes obtained from healthcare.