Sérgio Grief

Some scientific institutions, is saying quite concerned about the future of science, were the last day 13, Brasilia to try to mobilize members to rush the vote, and approval, of the Bill 1.153/95, regulating animal experimentation. The claim is that the lack of regulation, yet, makes the sector's performance fragile front groups opposed to animal testing. In this line of argument, science can not progress without animal testing, and it depends on human health. They also argue that there are still alternatives for all searches that are performed on animals.

This event brings up a discussion that can not be debated throughout society. Animals are models that reproduce the metabolism of human? Animal research benefits humans? We know that cancer is, since the mid- 80, so fatal to mice as the cold is for us. We know that rats have no more problem of high cholesterol, thanks to a cocktail of vitamins that scientists developed especially for them. We know that Parkinson's disease, Mal of Chagas, dwarfism and even mental deficit are problems of the past for these animals. And that rats suffering spinal cord injuries can walk again since the late 90.

All these promising results, already obtained many years, at the expense of many hours of work of scientists, many billions of taxpayer dollars, however, are useless for humans. Humans continue to die of cancer, suffering with your high cholesterol, Mal Parkinson, Chagas disease and paraplegia. Although the medicine is so advanced with respect to rodents, we are still crawling with regard to human.
This is because the model adopted to represent us does not represent us. All data obtained experimentally in animals can not be extrapolated to humans. While we share many physiological and metabolic characteristics with other animals, the species differences lead to very different results.

Animals are used in experiments because it is the model of medicine that has been developing since the eighteenth century, but in no way does this mean that this is the most correct way to improve population health.
Becomes offensive to see scientists, trained persons and they should seek the truth above all, use of aggressive language and maliciously to try to assert their particular interests. Hoje medicine is to discover behind it, is because it is based on animal experiments and will not be for animal experimentation she will develop.
Defend the end of animal testing is not put up against science and against the human, on the contrary, is to defend the interests of human and, above all, defend science.

The human medicine should proceed through the study of humans. This is not to arrest our enemies in concentration camps and use them as guinea pigs, Nor would this scientific. Currently the epidemiology and clinical medical sciences are peripheral challenge the big pharmaceutical industries and research institutions, producing new treatments and medications. But, although the sale of drugs meets the commercial interests of powerful groups, population health is not these drugs. When the scientist actually seeking the public's health, is not for the trapped animal in a laboratory he should look, but for the population that suffers from the disease as.

What are the origins of this disease? What are its causes? These causes can be avoided? Its symptoms can be circumvented without this is to create new diseases, with new symptoms?
The medicine based on animal experimentation does not benefit humans, unless they have business interests involved. A handful of medicine that benefits humans it is all based on human.

---

Sérgio Grief, Biologist group Vedder, in São Paulo (SP), Master in Food and Nutrition, co-author of the book “The True Face of Animal Experimentation: Your health in danger” and author of “Alternatives to the Use of Live Animals in Education: responsible for science”.