Animal experiment methods are required by many academic journals and regarded as the 'gold standard' of scientific testing, even though many researchers prefer alternatives or to work directly with human subjects.
FAUNALYTICS: The use of animals in scientific research has long been a focus of ethical debate. In the U.S., the most common animals used in experiments are rats and mice — some authors estimate that around 111.5 million rats and mice are tested on annually. While there have been some advances toward animal-free research over time, including the existence of non-animal methods like organ-on-a-chip technology and legislative proposals to reduce animal testing in the E.U., the fact remains that many animals around the world continue to be experimented on — even when it’s not necessary.
Part of the reason is because of a research publishing bias for animal-based methods. In other words, many scientific research journals require or show preference for animal studies even when they aren’t needed, or when animal-free methods can be used instead. To understand the causes, impacts, and solutions for animal methods bias, this paper summarizes the findings from a two-day workshop featuring academics, publishers, government representatives, and other stakeholders…
Animal methods have traditionally been regarded as one of the best forms of scientific testing (the “gold standard”), evidenced by the fact that many influential journals prefer or require them. Another attendee shared that many researchers would prefer to work directly with humans, but that ethical and legal requirements in certain locations make this difficult.
Overall, participants felt the barriers preventing science from overcoming animal methods bias include a resistance to change among academics, the competitive nature of research (in other words, researchers will do whatever it takes to get into influential journals), and the fact that there are many stakeholders with conflicting priorities involved in animal research…
At least one speaker noted that animal-free research is increasing over time, and some fields are becoming more accepting of non-animal methods than others. However, 60% of attendees felt that animal methods bias has a large to very large impact on scientific publishing… For animal advocates who aren’t in the science field, there may still be opportunities to get involved. For example, it’s important to educate the public about the benefits of using animal-free research methods. Advocates can also work with like-minded researchers to design campaigns and training materials targeting journal reviewers, editors, and researchers. SOURCE…
RELATED VIDEO: