Biomedicine Advancements by Octavio Cordova

Imagine all the research that has been done in the field of science, doesnt it make you
think how much of it has been ethical correct and how much has been done wrongly? This is a
question that is asked when a new experiment is about to be conducted in the search of
something new. What are the questions being asked to approve these experiments? With the
amount of technology that the world has now days we should look towards finding new ways
to improve our research experiments and involve less animals in the process.
In many experiments the work has to be determined by the scientist to see until what
extent he is willing to go to get the results. The scientist has to decide what will be his
stopping point or is he wiling to take it a step further, and have an un-ethical procedure in his
experiment. Most scientists will stop their experiment in order to keep their experiment
ethical, but would we be able to reduce the amount of time they take to stop the experiment
and bring less harm to animals? When I asked Tania Miramontes, A Building Scholar scientist,
she responded to me that in her point of view that it could be both ethical and non-ethical
because of the advancements in technology, that many of the experiments that have to be done
on animals can be eliminated. In some cases it something that cant be avoided as it serves the
purpose in advancements in science (2016).
Experiments being done can now eliminate many animals in the testing as the
evolution of technology in the fields of science have grown so much. The way that we can do
research now days we can make a significant move if we start to reduce the amount of animals
we use in the laboratories. Imagine being able to reduce the amount of pain we induce into
some animals inside the laboratories in order to get some results. The results that are being

obtained in the labs are not even 100% concrete that they will work on humans. 94% of drugs
that pass animal tests fail in human clinical trials (Understanding Animal Research, 2013).
This gives you an idea of the amount of animal testing we would be able to eliminate and not
have an impact on the outcome of results that come out. The results that test give should be
able to bring back information to the NIH when providing funds to the scientist for their
experiments if the results that they are getting are not compatible with humans.

Success rate in drugs after human

clinical trials.

According to neurologist Aysha Akhtar, MD, MPH, over 100 stroke drugs that were
effective when tested on animals have failed in humans, and over 85 HIV vaccines failed in
humans after working well in nonhuman primates (2013). Some of the
testing being done is not providing the
results we need. In the field of science
you are able to find different
approaches to solving a problem. We
should be able to perform different
experiments in order to reduce the
amount of animal testing being used in
the labs. The labs should be able to recommend other ways to provide better results and more
accurate results that will not fail in humans. References

Miramontes, T. (2016, March 26). Personal Interview

M.P.H., Aysha Akhtar M.D. "Want to Improve Medical Research? Cut Out the Animals!" The
Huffington Post. Accessed April 30, 2016. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ayshaakhtar/want-to-improve-medical-r_b_3576080.html.
Nine out of ten statistics are taken out of context. (n.d.). Retrieved April 30, 2016, from
http://www.understandinganimalresearch.org.uk/news/communications-media/nine-outof-ten-statistics-are-taken-out-of-context/