Four Breakthrough Methods That Can Replace Animal Testing

Animal testing has caused an uproar in the last decade, largely due to its questionable and arguably unethical methods. Oftentimes, these testing methods can include things like the application of chemicals to their skin, or even fed to them. Because of this, animal rights activists have been lobbying to prevent the use of animals in product testing, and fortunately, many are heeding their call. 

As the demand for so-called "cruelty-free" cosmetic products increases, scientists worldwide are racing to find better ways to test products without needing to use animals. The good news is, their efforts yielded successful results that allow the cosmetic industry to take steps and completely steer clear from animal testing in the near future. Here we look at these four common methods to use new products -- without impacting animal lives.

In Vitro Testing

In vitro testing is an exciting alternative to animal testing. In essence, it involves growing tissues from human cells that mimic the structure of organs. For cosmetic products, this affects growing tissues designed to mimic human skin. Human cells, typically stem cells, are used to make the tissues. The results of in vitro testing are more accurate than animal tests as since the cells are human, the results are closer to what happens when a real person uses the product. 

In addition, in vitro testing does not harm any animal, as the tissue cultures grown from the cells are not generally considered to be organisms by themselves. Many animal rights groups -- as well as scientific research groups -- have rallied behind the use of in vitro testing, promoting it as a non-animal testing alternative. While there are pros and cons to it, these groups have funded it to gain more insight into in vitro testing. 

Computer Modeling

Recent technological advances have made computer modeling for drug and cosmetic testing possible. Also known as in silico modeling, advanced computer models of different body tissues and organs are programmed to respond like genuine human body parts in reaction to the drug and cosmetic products.

There are also techniques like QSARs (quantitative structure-activity relationships), which are sophisticated computer-based methods that evaluate a substance's likelihood of being harmful towards humans. QSARs use existing data about human physiology and known substances to conclude a chemical component's safety.

Human Subjects

While this sounds risky at first, testing on consenting human subjects is not as dangerous as it seems. These participants are carefully evaluated before any cosmetic testing is made, and microdosing -- a method in which a controlled, extremely tiny dose of the product is used -- is usually done most of the time during these tests. 

Highly developed imaging devices then monitor the subject's reaction to the drug or product, then the data is analyzed by a machine to record the levels of reaction/non-reaction. Substances that cancel possible adverse effects of the product are within reach in case adverse reactions happen. Naturally, the test subjects are well-compensated for participating.

Through the work of these generous test subjects, scientists can replace specific tests (which were previously conducted on animals) with human testing. Furthermore, these tests are so sophisticated that single-neuron monitoring can determine whether a product is affecting the brain, underscoring both their reliability and accuracy.

Human Simulators

The use of computer-controlled human simulators is promising to replace all animal testing instances in the future. They help create test conditions for the safety of human pharmaceuticals and medical devices. These simulators have human-like characteristics, surprisingly like talking, breathing, bleeding, and even "dying." Their life-like attributes provide scientists insights into how a human could react to a particular product.

In the long history of scientific research, animal testing has been integral in keeping human safety the utmost priority. From developing cosmetics to NASA's development of radiation-resistant fabrics, animal testing has been a vital tool. Nonetheless, many scientists today believe that with advancements in technology and medicine, there are now many alternatives to animal experimentation that can replace it. 

Non-animal experimentation, according to many scientists today, is an inevitable change. And while the beauty industry cannot wholly eradicate animal testing, more and more companies are going cruelty-free. Hopefully, this will become the norm for the drug and cosmetic industry. As of now, ethical animal testing guidelines are being followed to ensure that the animals' dignity as feeling, sentient creatures are respected. 

Along with this, the guidelines also include reducing the number of animals involved, postponement of procedures until a non-animal testing method is available (that will yield the same results), responsibility towards the care and upkeep of the animals, maintenance of biological diversity, and minimal disruption of their habitats. 

© MD News Daily.