Animal testing and its alternatives : the most important omics is economics

Thumbnail Image
Date
2018
Authors
Editors
Contact
Journal ISSN
Electronic ISSN
ISBN
Bibliographical data
Publisher
Series
DOI (citable link)
ArXiv-ID
International patent number
Link to the license
EU project number
Project
Open Access publication
Collections
Restricted until
Title in another language
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Journal Issue
Publication type
Journal article
Publication status
Published
Published in
Alternatives to Animal Experimentation : ALTEX ; 35 (2018), 3. - pp. 275-305. - ISSN 1868-596X. - eISSN 1868-8551
Abstract
For a long time, the discussion about animal testing vs its alternatives centered on animal welfare. This was a static warfare, or at least a gridlock, where life scientists had to take a position and make their value choices and hardly anyone changed sides. Technical advances have changed the frontline somewhat, with in vitro and in silico methods gaining more ground. Only more recently has the economic view begun to have an impact: Many animal tests are simply too costly, take too long, and give misleading results. As an extension and update to previous articles in this series written a decade ago, we reanalyze the economic landscape of especially regulatory use of animal testing and this time also consider respective alternative tests. Despite some ambiguity and data gaps, which we have filled with crude estimates, a picture emerges of globally regulated industries that are subject to stark geographic and sectorial differences in regulation, which determine their corresponding animal use. Both animal testing and its alternatives are industries in their own right, offering remarkable business opportunities for biotech and IT companies as well as contract research organizations. In light of recent revelations as to the reproducibility and relevance issues of many animal tests, the economic consequences of incorrect results and the reasons for still maintaining often outdated animal test approaches are discussed.
Summary in another language
Subject (DDC)
570 Biosciences, Biology
Keywords
Conference
Review
undefined / . - undefined, undefined. - (undefined; undefined)
Cite This
ISO 690MEIGS, Lucy, Lena SMIRNOVA, Costanza ROVIDA, Marcel LEIST, Thomas HARTUNG, 2018. Animal testing and its alternatives : the most important omics is economics. In: Alternatives to Animal Experimentation : ALTEX. 35(3), pp. 275-305. ISSN 1868-596X. eISSN 1868-8551. Available under: doi: 10.14573/altex.1807041
BibTex
@article{Meigs2018Anima-42933,
  year={2018},
  doi={10.14573/altex.1807041},
  title={Animal testing and its alternatives : the most important omics is economics},
  number={3},
  volume={35},
  issn={1868-596X},
  journal={Alternatives to Animal Experimentation : ALTEX},
  pages={275--305},
  author={Meigs, Lucy and Smirnova, Lena and Rovida, Costanza and Leist, Marcel and Hartung, Thomas}
}
RDF
<rdf:RDF
    xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/"
    xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#"
    xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
    xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#"
    xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > 
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/42933">
    <dc:creator>Smirnova, Lena</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Meigs, Lucy</dc:creator>
    <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2018-07-31T10:54:40Z</dc:date>
    <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"/>
    <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/>
    <dc:creator>Hartung, Thomas</dc:creator>
    <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/42933"/>
    <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2018-07-31T10:54:40Z</dcterms:available>
    <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/28"/>
    <dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/42933/1/Meigs_2-18z7vzsxqghdv9.pdf"/>
    <dc:rights>Attribution 4.0 International</dc:rights>
    <dc:contributor>Rovida, Costanza</dc:contributor>
    <dc:creator>Rovida, Costanza</dc:creator>
    <dc:contributor>Meigs, Lucy</dc:contributor>
    <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
    <dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/42933/1/Meigs_2-18z7vzsxqghdv9.pdf"/>
    <dcterms:title>Animal testing and its alternatives : the most important omics is economics</dcterms:title>
    <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/>
    <dc:contributor>Hartung, Thomas</dc:contributor>
    <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/28"/>
    <dc:contributor>Smirnova, Lena</dc:contributor>
    <dc:creator>Leist, Marcel</dc:creator>
    <dc:contributor>Leist, Marcel</dc:contributor>
    <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">For a long time, the discussion about animal testing vs its alternatives centered on animal welfare. This was a static warfare, or at least a gridlock, where life scientists had to take a position and make their value choices and hardly anyone changed sides. Technical advances have changed the frontline somewhat, with in vitro and in silico methods gaining more ground. Only more recently has the economic view begun to have an impact: Many animal tests are simply too costly, take too long, and give misleading results. As an extension and update to previous articles in this series written a decade ago, we reanalyze the economic landscape of especially regulatory use of animal testing and this time also consider respective alternative tests. Despite some ambiguity and data gaps, which we have filled with crude estimates, a picture emerges of globally regulated industries that are subject to stark geographic and sectorial differences in regulation, which determine their corresponding animal use. Both animal testing and its alternatives are industries in their own right, offering remarkable business opportunities for biotech and IT companies as well as contract research organizations. In light of recent revelations as to the reproducibility and relevance issues of many animal tests, the economic consequences of incorrect results and the reasons for still maintaining often outdated animal test approaches are discussed.</dcterms:abstract>
    <dcterms:issued>2018</dcterms:issued>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>
Internal note
xmlui.Submission.submit.DescribeStep.inputForms.label.kops_note_fromSubmitter
Contact
URL of original publication
Test date of URL
Examination date of dissertation
Method of financing
Comment on publication
Alliance license
Corresponding Authors der Uni Konstanz vorhanden
International Co-Authors
Bibliography of Konstanz
Yes
Refereed
Yes