Animal testing for medicine has always been a contentious issue. Last month, the EPA’s plan to stop all funding into animal research by 2035 was met with criticism from Speaking of Research, an international advocacy group. In the United Kingdom, animal testing is also recognised as ‘a vital tool’ in scientific research. Although this argument has merit, it cannot be ignored that animal testing comes with many practical faults as well as the many ethical implications. 

On 6th November, Science Translational Medicine published Jang et al.’s study. This used Organ-on-Chips (Organ Chips) technology, the process of creating a chip lined with cells that are specific to a certain organ that then simulates the responses of that organ. In the study, they created species-specific Liver-Chip that contained rat, dog and human cells to examine differences in the species’ reactions to drugs.

Their findings re-affirm the fact that animal testing is far from a perfect method as they pointed towards species differences. For instance, Bosentan (a drug for high blood pressure) can cause liver toxicity in humans but was found to have no effect on the rat cells. This could be due to the fact that different species have alternative amounts of toxic bile acids. From this research, it can be seen that animal testing can sometimes be useless, as the money and time spent on a drug that passes animal trials may then be unusable for humans.

Furthermore, the study also examined the reverse – when a drug is abandoned because it does not pass animal testing but may have no effect on humans. The rat Liver-Chip responded to JNJ-2 with liver toxicity but no response was found after 14 days in the human Liver-Chip. Relying entirely on animal results, as shown by this study, can lead to missed opportunities for finding drugs that work for humans.

In 2017, 1.89 million animals were used for experimental research in the United Kingdom. There is an abundance of different opinions surrounding the ethics of animal testing, but this is a strikingly large figure. We must question whether animal testing is the best process to continue using or whether scientific research should turn its attention to alternative methods. Currently, animal testing for cosmetic products is banned in the United Kingdom under EU regulation, so it is time to turn our attention to progressing medical research in the same direction.

In October, footage from the Laboratory of Pharmacology and Toxicology near Hamburg sparked outrage as it showed monkeys and dogs kept in cruel conditions and treated aggressively – for example one of the macaque monkeys being hit against a door. This laboratory was condemned for not meeting EU regulations, but the widespread disgust across the internet points to the difficulty in the ethics of animal testing. Whilst animals in approved animal research are treated more humanely, they are still being exploited by humans for our own benefit.

Instead, Organ Chips offer an ethical alternative for the future as they can be made to mimic a specific human organ. Moreover, researchers at The Wyss Institute have created ‘human Body-On-Chips’ that use a transferral of fluid to mimic the whole body. This points to the future capabilities of Organ Chips technology.

Another possible strength of Organs Chips is that The Wyss Institute are researching into manufacturing chips with specialised cells that can mimic an individual’s makeup. Not only can Organ Chips improve upon animal testing by being specific to humans in general, there is potential for them to be made specific to each individual human. 

Currently, Organ Chips technology is by no means cheap, but it does not come with the cost of animal life.