• aeternum@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    1 year ago

    there is no need to use animal testing anymore. There are supercomputers that are much more realistic than testing this horseshit on defenceless animals that are a completely different species to us.

    • AlolanYoda
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I work in a related field and while I don’t know anything about supercomputers being more realistic, there is a movement to eliminate animal testing and instead use organ-on-chip models - still using cells, but in vitro. The advantage is not only that you eliminate animal suffering, but also that you can use human cells, so your tests are much more quickly applicable to humans. In fact, in a far away future, you could even test with your cells and see how a specific treatment affects you. Super interesting stuff!

      • fossilesqueOPM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        As much as this freaks me out in an imagination-run-wild sci-fi wasteland way, I WISH we had tech like that. It would help so much with preventative medicine.

      • Tomassci@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        There’s also the idea of organoids for studying development without having to study the entire organism.

    • QuinceDaPence@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Computers can run a model…but you have to have real world data to create and improve the model. Plus there’s always the chance the model is wrong or has some inaccuracy in it.

      • 🦄🦄🦄@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        A model is more accurate than a mouse, when it comes to weather medication is safe for a human. A huge chunks of trials that passed the non-human animal testing stages fail when applied to humans.

        • fossilesqueOPM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Do you have a source for this? Curious. My impressions were we are trying to get there but have a way to go yet. Brains, etc. have just been mapped in the last year and are far from perfect. This is the ultimate goal, though. My university requires you to go through an ethics board before you can touch living things.