APE - Against Primates in Experiments

Why I Take Animal-Tested Drugs
by Simon Chaitowitz

One of my doctors has told me to get my affairs in order, which is why
I'm writing this column. I want to explain why someone who takes so
many animal-tested drugs is opposed to animal research.

I have full-blown leukemia and the chemotherapy I'm taking doesn't seem
to be working all that well. And even if it does kick into high gear
soon, it's not a cure, only a brief delay of the disease's progression.
One way or another, my odds aren't good.

Still, I keep popping pills each morning and night, sitting for many
hours each week with an IV in my arm, dealing with all the side-effects
of treatment, hoping for a miracle. Some people may call me a
hypocrite—to take advantage of the benefits of animal research. Let me
explain.

The truth is that I don't feel I've ultimately benefited from our
healthcare system, despite some truly exceptional care and many
amazingly compassionate practitioners. Just the opposite.

I first developed myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) in 2004 from the chemo
I was prescribed for breast cancer. In 2006, I underwent a stem cell
transplant, which gave me two years of remission (albeit with many
horrible side effects). This past July, I relapsed—this time with acute
myeloid leukemia (AML). My prognosis is grim.

Throughout the past six years, I have felt terribly guilty about the
drugs and procedures I've undergone because I know that so many animals
have suffered in their development. I know about these conditions
because of my former job—working for a nonprofit that promotes
alternatives to animal research. I know about the conditions from
talking with former animal researchers and others who have witnessed
the cruelty. In fact, one man I know from an Internet support group
remembers hearing lab dogs yelping in pain at the hospital where we
both had our transplants.

The truth--mostly hidden from public view--is that animal research is
horribly cruel. Despite what the research community claims, federal
regulations are extremely weak and poorly enforced, and some
species—mice, for example—are completely excluded from any protection.
Many investigations have shown just how bad conditions are.

But as someone who recently signed up for hospice, I have another major
problem with animal research. I wonder if science would have found a
cure for my leukemia by now if they weren't sidetracked by misleading
animal tests. I wonder if the chemo that I took for breast cancer would
have been safer it hadn't been tested in species that are so unlike our
own.

The truth is that using animals to develop and test drugs is a system
that doesn't work very well. It's an old paradigm, one that is
fortunately beginning to change, however slowly. A growing number of
scientists are developing some exciting (and more effective)
non-animal alternatives. These changes have been inspired partly by concern over
animal cruelty but also because animal research and testing have so
often failed us. Some government agencies are even starting to call for
more alternatives.

More than 90 percent of all new drugs which proved effective in animals
end up not working for humans. It's because animals—however similar
they are to us—have different physiological systems. What works in a
mouse usually doesn't work in a human.

History is filled with stories of drugs that didn't work in

animals—Aspirin, for example—that ended up working in humans. And the
obituary pages are filled with stories of people who died from drugs
that looked safe in animals. The painkiller Vioxx, for example, tested
safe in mice and five other species but ended up killing many thousands
of Americans.

If you wonder how I can justify taking the drugs, the truth is that
like all living beings ("lab animals" included) I desperately want to
live. And because of government regulations, I don't have a choice.

The current drug approval system doesn't yet acknowledge the
superiority of human-focused, nonanimal research methods (such as
microdosing) and all pharmaceutical companies must use animals to get
their drugs approved. Hopefully, this situation will soon change. A
coalition of animal protection groups and physicians has petitioned the
U.S. Food and Drug Administration to accept the results of alternative
tests, when available.

If the chemo drugs I'm trying now don't work, I do have one last
option. I could try a Phase One trial. That's when a drug looks
promising in animals and is first tested in humans. My doctor started
to tell me why so many participants die in Phase One trials—but it
turned out I already knew the answer. Drugs that work in animals, he
explained, usually don't work in humans.