生物医学研究中动物使用简史及非动物替代品展望。

IF 3.1 3区 农林科学 Q1 VETERINARY SCIENCES Ilar Journal Pub Date : 2021-12-31 DOI:10.1093/ilar/ilab020
Lewis B Kinter, Ron DeHaven, David K Johnson, Joseph J DeGeorge
{"title":"生物医学研究中动物使用简史及非动物替代品展望。","authors":"Lewis B Kinter,&nbsp;Ron DeHaven,&nbsp;David K Johnson,&nbsp;Joseph J DeGeorge","doi":"10.1093/ilar/ilab020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Animals have been closely observed by humans for at least 17 000 years to gain critical knowledge for human and later animal survival. Routine scientific observations of animals as human surrogates began in the late 19th century driven by increases in new compounds resulting from synthetic chemistry and requiring characterization for potential therapeutic utility and safety. Statistics collected by the United States Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service and United Kingdom Home Office show that animal usage in biomedical research and teaching activities peaked after the mid-20th century and thereafter fell precipitously until the early 21st century, when annual increases (in the UK) were again observed, this time driven by expansion of genetically modified animal technologies. The statistics also show a dramatic transfer of research burden in the 20th and 21st centuries away from traditional larger and more publicly sensitive species (dogs, cats, non-human primates, etc) towards smaller, less publicly sensitive mice, rats, and fish. These data show that new technology can produce multi-faceted outcomes to reduce and/or to increase annual animal usage and to redistribute species burden in biomedical research. From these data, it is estimated that annual total vertebrate animal usage in biomedical research and teaching in the United States was 15 to 25 million per year during 2001-2018. Finally, whereas identification and incorporation of non-animal alternatives are products of, but not an integral component of, the animal research cycle, they replace further use of animals for specific research and product development purposes and create their own scientific research cycles, but are not necessarily a substitute for animals or humans for discovery, acquisition, and application of new (eg, previously unknown and/or unsuspected) knowledge critical to further advance human and veterinary medicine and global species survival.</p>","PeriodicalId":56299,"journal":{"name":"Ilar Journal","volume":"62 1-2","pages":"7-16"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Brief History of Use of Animals in Biomedical Research and Perspective on Non-Animal Alternatives.\",\"authors\":\"Lewis B Kinter,&nbsp;Ron DeHaven,&nbsp;David K Johnson,&nbsp;Joseph J DeGeorge\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ilar/ilab020\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Animals have been closely observed by humans for at least 17 000 years to gain critical knowledge for human and later animal survival. Routine scientific observations of animals as human surrogates began in the late 19th century driven by increases in new compounds resulting from synthetic chemistry and requiring characterization for potential therapeutic utility and safety. Statistics collected by the United States Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service and United Kingdom Home Office show that animal usage in biomedical research and teaching activities peaked after the mid-20th century and thereafter fell precipitously until the early 21st century, when annual increases (in the UK) were again observed, this time driven by expansion of genetically modified animal technologies. The statistics also show a dramatic transfer of research burden in the 20th and 21st centuries away from traditional larger and more publicly sensitive species (dogs, cats, non-human primates, etc) towards smaller, less publicly sensitive mice, rats, and fish. These data show that new technology can produce multi-faceted outcomes to reduce and/or to increase annual animal usage and to redistribute species burden in biomedical research. From these data, it is estimated that annual total vertebrate animal usage in biomedical research and teaching in the United States was 15 to 25 million per year during 2001-2018. Finally, whereas identification and incorporation of non-animal alternatives are products of, but not an integral component of, the animal research cycle, they replace further use of animals for specific research and product development purposes and create their own scientific research cycles, but are not necessarily a substitute for animals or humans for discovery, acquisition, and application of new (eg, previously unknown and/or unsuspected) knowledge critical to further advance human and veterinary medicine and global species survival.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56299,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ilar Journal\",\"volume\":\"62 1-2\",\"pages\":\"7-16\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ilar Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ilar/ilab020\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"VETERINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ilar Journal","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ilar/ilab020","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

摘要

人类对动物的密切观察至少有17000年,以获得人类和后来动物生存的关键知识。19世纪后期,由于合成化学产生的新化合物的增加以及对潜在治疗效用和安全性的要求,对动物作为人类替代品的常规科学观察开始了。美国农业部动植物卫生检验局和英国内政部收集的统计数据表明,生物医学研究和教学活动中动物的使用在20世纪中叶之后达到顶峰,此后急剧下降,直到21世纪初才再次出现年度增长(在英国),这一次是由转基因动物技术的扩张推动的。统计数据还显示,在20世纪和21世纪,研究负担从传统的体型较大、对公众敏感的物种(狗、猫、非人类灵长类动物等)急剧转移到体型较小、对公众敏感程度较低的小鼠、大鼠和鱼类。这些数据表明,新技术可以产生多方面的结果,以减少和/或增加每年的动物使用量,并重新分配生物医学研究中的物种负担。根据这些数据,据估计,2001年至2018年期间,美国生物医学研究和教学中每年使用的脊椎动物总数为1500万至2500万只。最后,虽然非动物替代品的识别和纳入是动物研究周期的产物,但不是动物研究周期的组成部分,它们取代了为特定研究和产品开发目的进一步使用动物,并创造了自己的科学研究周期,但不一定取代动物或人类发现、获取和应用新的(例如:以前未知和/或未怀疑的)知识对进一步推进人类和兽医医学以及全球物种生存至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A Brief History of Use of Animals in Biomedical Research and Perspective on Non-Animal Alternatives.

Animals have been closely observed by humans for at least 17 000 years to gain critical knowledge for human and later animal survival. Routine scientific observations of animals as human surrogates began in the late 19th century driven by increases in new compounds resulting from synthetic chemistry and requiring characterization for potential therapeutic utility and safety. Statistics collected by the United States Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service and United Kingdom Home Office show that animal usage in biomedical research and teaching activities peaked after the mid-20th century and thereafter fell precipitously until the early 21st century, when annual increases (in the UK) were again observed, this time driven by expansion of genetically modified animal technologies. The statistics also show a dramatic transfer of research burden in the 20th and 21st centuries away from traditional larger and more publicly sensitive species (dogs, cats, non-human primates, etc) towards smaller, less publicly sensitive mice, rats, and fish. These data show that new technology can produce multi-faceted outcomes to reduce and/or to increase annual animal usage and to redistribute species burden in biomedical research. From these data, it is estimated that annual total vertebrate animal usage in biomedical research and teaching in the United States was 15 to 25 million per year during 2001-2018. Finally, whereas identification and incorporation of non-animal alternatives are products of, but not an integral component of, the animal research cycle, they replace further use of animals for specific research and product development purposes and create their own scientific research cycles, but are not necessarily a substitute for animals or humans for discovery, acquisition, and application of new (eg, previously unknown and/or unsuspected) knowledge critical to further advance human and veterinary medicine and global species survival.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ilar Journal
Ilar Journal 农林科学-兽医学
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
20.00%
发文量
8
审稿时长
>18 weeks
期刊介绍: The ILAR Journal is the peer-reviewed, theme-oriented publication of the Institute for Laboratory Animal Research (ILAR), which provides timely information for all who study, use, care for, and oversee the use of animals in research. The journal publishes original articles that review research on animals either as direct subjects or as surrogates for humans. According to policy, any previously unpublished animal research reported in the ILAR Journal will have been conducted according to the scientific, technical, and humanely appropriate guidelines current at the time the research was conducted in accordance with the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals or other guidance provided by taxonomically-oriented professional societies (e.g., American Society of Mammalogy) as referenced in the Guide.
期刊最新文献
ILAR: A Retrospective and Prospective Look A Structured Approach to Optimizing Animal Model Selection for Human Translation: The Animal Model Quality Assessment. Livestock and Risk Group 4 Pathogens: Researching Zoonotic Threats to Public Health and Agriculture in Maximum Containment. Fit for Purpose Assessment: A New Direction for IACUCs. Animals as Beneficiaries of Biomedical Research Originally Intended for Humans.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1