Should we REALLY be testing on animals?
by Freddie
Did you put on a hair product this morning? Or maybe use a shower gel? The likeliness is that it has been tested on animals. People could argue that mice are similar (biologically) to humans, but that is simply wrong. In the words of Professor Mike Philpott, a skin, hair and cancer researcher at The Blizard institute, “I would argue that animal skin, especially mouse skin, is a very poor model for human skin. Mouse skin is only 2 or 3 cell layers thick, human skin is about 30 layers thick, mouse skin is covered in hair, human skin doesn’t have as many hair follicles.”
His touching story about how he took a rat that was being used for testing home and looked after it perfectly explains his ethical reasons for abandoning animal testing.
His touching story about how he took a rat that was being used for testing home and looked after it perfectly explains his ethical reasons for abandoning animal testing.
When I visited The Blizard Institute, at Queen Mary University of London, I was shown around the labs by a current PhD student. We then interviewed another scientist, Dr Adrian Biddle, on his work there. He explains how he believes that in vitro testing is more tractable (a word which means more accurate and reliable). He raises a very important point “If you have set of mice, which mouse is going to be different?”
He then goes on to explain that since he was 8, when his school teacher gave him the science encyclopaedia, he has never considered being anything except a scientist.
He then goes on to explain that since he was 8, when his school teacher gave him the science encyclopaedia, he has never considered being anything except a scientist.
Other news about Queen Mary University:
Bumblebees have learnt to score goals!
Vitamin D pills could cut risk of colds and flu!
Finally, goats are just as clever as dogs!
Bumblebees have learnt to score goals!
Vitamin D pills could cut risk of colds and flu!
Finally, goats are just as clever as dogs!