Animal testing on rodents
In the United Kingdom in 2012, 3,045,690 mice, 262,641 rats and 28,677 other rodents were used (83.1% of the total animals used that year).
In the U.S., the numbers of rats and mice used are not reported, but have been estimated at approximately 100 million. In 2000, the Federal Research Division, Library of Congress, published the results of an analysis of its Rats/Mice/and Birds Database: Researchers, Breeders, Transporters, and Exhibitors.
Over 2,000 research organizations are listed in the database, of which approximately 500 were researched and of these, 100 were contacted directly by FRD staff. These organizations include hospitals, government organizations, private companies (pharmaceutical companies, etc.), universities/colleges, a few secondary schools, and research institutes. Of these 2,000, approximately 960 are regulated by USDA; 349 by NIH; and 560 accredited by AALAC. Approximately 50 percent of the organizations contacted revealed a specific or approximated number of animals in their laboratories. The total number of animals for those organizations is: 250,000–1,000,000 rats; 400,000–2,000,000 mice; and 130,000–900,000 birds.
Mice are the most commonly used vertebrate species, popular because of their availability, size, low cost, ease of handling, and fast reproduction rate.
They are widely considered to be the prime model of inherited human disease and share 99% of their genes with humans. With the advent of genetic engineering technology, genetically modified mice can be generated to order and can cost hundreds of dollars each.
Transgenic animal production consists of injecting each construct into 300–350 eggs, typically representing three days' work. Twenty to fifty mice will normally be born from this number of injected eggs. These animals are screened for the presence of the transgene by a polymerase chain reaction genotyping assay. The number of transgenic animals typically varies from two to eight.
Chimeric mouse production consists of injecting embryonic stem cells provided by the investigator into 150–175 blastocysts, representing three days of work. Thirty to fifty live mice are normally born from this number of injected blastocysts. Normally, the skin color of the mice from which the host blastocysts are derived is different from that of the strain used to produce the embryonic stem cells. Typically two to six mice will have skin and hair with greater than seventy percent ES cell contribution, indicating a good chance for embryonic stem cell contribution to the germline.
|This section requires expansion. (May 2015)|
|This section requires expansion. (May 2015)|
While mice, rats and other rodents are by far the most widely used animals in biomedical research, recent studies have highlighted their limitations. For example, the utility of the use of rodents in testing for sepsis, burns, inflammation, stroke, ALS, Alzheimer’s, diabetes, cancer, multiple scrosis, Parkinson’s disease and other illnesses has been called into question by a number of researchers. Regarding experiments on mice in particular, some researchers have complained that “years and billions of dollars have been wasted following false leads” as a result of a preoccupation with the use of these animals in studies.
An article in The Scientist notes, “The difficulties associated with using animal models for human disease result from the metabolic, anatomic, and cellular differences between humans and other creatures, but the problems go even deeper than that” including issues with the design and execution of the tests themselves.
For example, researchers have found that many rats and mice in laboratories are obese from excess food and minimal exercise which alters their physiology and drug metabolism. Many laboratory animals, including mice and rats, are chronically stressed which can also negatively affect research outcomes and the ability to accurately extrapolate findings to humans. Researchers have also noted that many studies involving mice, rats and other rodents are poorly designed, leading to questionable findings.
- Animal Testing
- Animal model
- Mouse models of colorectal and intestinal cancer
- Preclinical imaging
- Rat Park
- Testing cosmetics on animals
- Mouse models of breast cancer metastasis
- "Annual Statistics of Scientific Procedures on Living Animals, Great Britain, 2013 Home Office
- Carbone, L (2004). What Animals Want: Expertise and Advocacy in Laboratory Animal Welfare Policy. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780195161960.
- Willis-Owen SA, Flint J (2006). "The genetic basis of emotional behaviour in mice". Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 14 (6): 721–8. doi:10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201569. PMID 16721408.
- The Measure Of Man, Sanger Institute Press Release, 5 December 2002
- Taconic Transgenic Models, Taconic Biosciences
- "WUSM :: Mouse Genetics Core :: Services". Washington University in St. Louis. 2005-07-07. Retrieved 2007-10-22.
- Kolata, Gina (11 February 2013). "Mice Fall Short as Test Subjects for Some of Humans’ Deadly Ills". New York Times. Retrieved 6 August 2015.
- Seok et al. (7 January 2013). "Genomic responses in mouse models poorly mimic human inflammatory diseases". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Retrieved 6 August 2015.
- Bart van der Worp, H (30 March 2010). "Can Animal Models of Disease Reliably Inform Human Studies?". PLOS Medicine. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000245. Retrieved 6 August 2015.
- Gawrylewski, Andrea (1 July 2007). "The Trouble With Animal Models". The Scientist. Retrieved 6 August 2015.
- Benatar, M (April 2007). "Lost in translation: Treatment trials in the SOD1 mouse and in human ALS". Neurobiology of Disease 26 (1): 1–13. doi:10.1016/j.nbd.2006.12.015. Retrieved 6 August 2015.
- Check Hayden, Erika (26 March 2014). "Misleading mouse studies waste medical resources". Nature. Retrieved 6 August 2015.
- Perrin, Steve (26 March 2014). "Preclinical research: Make mouse studies work". Nature. Retrieved 6 August 2015.
- Cavanaugh, Sarah; Pippin, John; Bernard, Neal (10 April 2013). "Animal models of Alzheimer disease: historical pitfalls and a path forward1" (PDF). ALTEX 31 (3): 279–302. doi:10.14573/altex.1310071. Retrieved 6 August 2015.
- Roep, Bart; Atkinson, Mark; von Herrath, Matthias (November 2004). "Satisfaction (not) guaranteed: re-evaluating the use of animal models in type 1 diabeties". Nature Immunology 4: 989–997. Retrieved 6 August 2015.
- Charukeshi Chandrasekera, P; Pippin, John (21 November 2013). "Of Rodents and Men: Species-Specific Glucose Regulation and Type 2 Diabetes Research" (PDF). ALTEX 31. doi:10.14573/altex.1309231. Retrieved 6 August 2015.
- Glenn Begley, C; Ellis, L (29 March 2012). "Drug development: Raise standards for preclinical cancer research". Nature 483: 531–533. doi:10.1038/483531a. Retrieved 6 August 2015.
- Voskoglou-Nomikos, T; Pater, J; Seymour, L (15 September 2003). "Clinical predictive value of the in vitro cell line, human xenograft, and mouse allograft preclinical cancer models" (PDF). Clinical Cancer Research 9: 4227– 4239. Retrieved 6 August 2015.
- Dennis, C (17 August 2006). "Cancer: off by a whisker". Nature 442 (7104): 739–41. PMID 16915261. Retrieved 6 August 2015.
- Garber, K (6 September 2006). "Debate Grows Over New Mouse Models of Cancer". Journal of the National Cancer Institute 98 (17). doi:10.1093/jnci/djj381. PMID 16954466. Retrieved 6 August 2015.
- Begley, Sharon (5 September 2008). "Rethinking the war on cancer". Newsweek. Retrieved 6 August 2015.
- Bolker, Jessica (1 November 2012). "There's more to life than rats and flies". Nature. Retrieved 6 August 2015.
- Cressey, Daniel (2 March 2010). "Fat rats skew research results". Nature 464 (19). doi:10.1038/464019a. Retrieved 6 August 2015.
- Balcomb, J; Barnard, N; Sandusky, C (November 2004). "Laboratory routines cause animal stress.". Contemporary Topics in Laboratory Animal Science 43 (6): 42–51. PMID 15669134. Retrieved 6 August 2015.
- Murgatroyd, C et al. (8 November 2009). "Dynamic DNA methylation programs persistent adverse effects of early-life stress". Nature Neuroscience 12: 1559–1566. doi:10.1038/nn.2436. Retrieved 6 August 2015.