使医学研究现代化,造福人类和动物。

IF 7.2 1区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS Economic Geography Pub Date : 2022-05-03 DOI:10.3390/ani12091173
Isobel Hutchinson, Carla Owen, Jarrod Bailey
{"title":"使医学研究现代化,造福人类和动物。","authors":"Isobel Hutchinson, Carla Owen, Jarrod Bailey","doi":"10.3390/ani12091173","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the context of widespread public and political concern around the use of animals in research, we sought to examine the scientific, ethical and economic arguments around the replacement of animals with New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) and to situate this within a regulatory context. We also analyzed the extent to which animal replacement aligns with British public and policymakers' priorities and explored global progress towards this outcome. The global context is especially relevant given the international nature of regulatory guidance on the safety testing of new medicines. We used a range of evidence to analyze this area, including scientific papers; expert economic analysis; public opinion polls and the Hansard of the UK Parliament. We found evidence indicating that replacing animals with NAMs would benefit animal welfare, public health and the economy. The majority of the British public is in favor of efforts to replace animals and focusing on this area would help to support the British Government's current policy priorities. We believe that this evidence underlines the need for strong action from policymakers to accelerate the transition from animal experiments to NAMs. The specific measure we suggest is to introduce a new ministerial position to coordinate and accelerate the replacement of animals with NAMs.</p>","PeriodicalId":48225,"journal":{"name":"Economic Geography","volume":"77 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9100373/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Modernizing Medical Research to Benefit People and Animals.\",\"authors\":\"Isobel Hutchinson, Carla Owen, Jarrod Bailey\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/ani12091173\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In the context of widespread public and political concern around the use of animals in research, we sought to examine the scientific, ethical and economic arguments around the replacement of animals with New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) and to situate this within a regulatory context. We also analyzed the extent to which animal replacement aligns with British public and policymakers' priorities and explored global progress towards this outcome. The global context is especially relevant given the international nature of regulatory guidance on the safety testing of new medicines. We used a range of evidence to analyze this area, including scientific papers; expert economic analysis; public opinion polls and the Hansard of the UK Parliament. We found evidence indicating that replacing animals with NAMs would benefit animal welfare, public health and the economy. The majority of the British public is in favor of efforts to replace animals and focusing on this area would help to support the British Government's current policy priorities. We believe that this evidence underlines the need for strong action from policymakers to accelerate the transition from animal experiments to NAMs. The specific measure we suggest is to introduce a new ministerial position to coordinate and accelerate the replacement of animals with NAMs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48225,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Economic Geography\",\"volume\":\"77 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9100373/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Economic Geography\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12091173\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Economic Geography","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12091173","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在公众和政界普遍关注在研究中使用动物的背景下,我们试图研究用新方法(NAMs)替代动物的科学、伦理和经济论据,并将其置于监管背景之下。我们还分析了动物替代在多大程度上符合英国公众和政策制定者的优先考虑,并探讨了全球在实现这一成果方面取得的进展。鉴于新药安全测试监管指南的国际性,全球背景尤其重要。我们使用了一系列证据来分析这一领域,包括科学论文、专家经济分析、民意调查和英国议会议事录。我们发现有证据表明,用非甲氧基甲烷替代动物将有利于动物福利、公众健康和经济发展。大多数英国公众赞成取代动物的努力,关注这一领域将有助于支持英国政府当前的优先政策。我们认为,这些证据突出表明,政策制定者需要采取强有力的行动,加快从动物实验向非动物实验的过渡。我们建议的具体措施是设立一个新的部级职位,以协调和加速用非动物实验取代动物实验。
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
Modernizing Medical Research to Benefit People and Animals.

In the context of widespread public and political concern around the use of animals in research, we sought to examine the scientific, ethical and economic arguments around the replacement of animals with New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) and to situate this within a regulatory context. We also analyzed the extent to which animal replacement aligns with British public and policymakers' priorities and explored global progress towards this outcome. The global context is especially relevant given the international nature of regulatory guidance on the safety testing of new medicines. We used a range of evidence to analyze this area, including scientific papers; expert economic analysis; public opinion polls and the Hansard of the UK Parliament. We found evidence indicating that replacing animals with NAMs would benefit animal welfare, public health and the economy. The majority of the British public is in favor of efforts to replace animals and focusing on this area would help to support the British Government's current policy priorities. We believe that this evidence underlines the need for strong action from policymakers to accelerate the transition from animal experiments to NAMs. The specific measure we suggest is to introduce a new ministerial position to coordinate and accelerate the replacement of animals with NAMs.

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
Economic Geography
Economic Geography Multiple-
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
2.90%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Economic Geography is a peer-reviewed journal dedicated to publishing original research that advances the field of economic geography. Their goal is to publish high-quality studies that are both theoretically robust and grounded in empirical evidence, contributing to our understanding of the geographic factors and consequences of economic processes. It welcome submissions on a wide range of topics that provide primary evidence for significant theoretical interventions, offering key insights into important economic, social, development, and environmental issues. To ensure the highest quality publications, all submissions undergo a rigorous peer-review process with at least three external referees and an editor. Economic Geography has been owned by Clark University since 1925 and plays a central role in supporting the global activities of the field, providing publications and other forms of scholarly support. The journal is published five times a year in January, March, June, August, and November.
期刊最新文献
From Paso del Norte to the Borderplex: Labor Devaluation, Bordering, and the Remaking of Uneven Development in the US–Mexico Borderlands Geographies of Knowledge Sourcing and the Complexity of Knowledge in Multilocational Firms State–Firm Nexus, Indigenous Coupling, and Social Downgrading in the Aerospace Global Production Network: A Case Study of Embraer, Brazil Agency, Temporalities, and the Mediation of COVID within Global Production Networks Theory and Explanation in Geography
×
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