An AP story that practically glows as it describes in objectifying detail how mice are used in scientific research at least features this one telling quote:
...it remains to be seen whether a leap can be made from mice with knocked-out genes to therapies for humans. In the past, discoveries that looked promising in rodents have often failed in human patients.In the meantime, millions die, often painfully, as they
succumb to Alzheimer's disease, obesity, diabetes, cancer and countless other conditions... *snip* As many as 25 million mice are now used in experiments each year.25 million... I really don't like comparing mice to men, so to speak, much less drawing Holocaust comparisons. But think about it: Humans were experimented on and killed by the millions (with scientific interests used to justify some of those), and today we're killing 4 times as many animals (whose "genes are remarkably similar to a person's") than ever on the off-chance that one of these studies might lead to a breakthrough that might lead to a development that mead lead to a cure for an illness (or, more likely, a drug that doesn't cure the illness, but reduces symptoms -- with side effects -- and makes billions for those who invent it).
Typical of the debate of using animals in research, they are so, so similar to us, yet so different. The differences that make the results in animals fail in humans tells us how hit and miss (mostly miss) this work is, and thus how cruel it is to go through these animals like they're cheap, expendable, widgets. And the similarities tell us that it's our ethical obligation not to do so.
Categories: animal research | vivisection
