Government has stopped lab testing of animals for bio-chemical research
At a time when the European Union (EU), US and China are debating the ethics of animal testing for the greater good, it is commendable that India, which had banned animal testing for cosmetics before the US and barred brands that did, has adopted a more empathetic code of testing for bio-chemical research. The Central Insecticide Board & Registration Committee (CIBRC) under the Ministry of Agriculture has revised its pesticide testing regulations which direct companies to devise alternative lab procedures and in absolutely unavoidable circumstances, follow strict dosing codes and a humane approach that would not be fatal for rabbits or rats. This is indeed a bold step considering the EU itself has not been able to push an animal testing ban for pharmacological research after its huge consensus on the cosmetic ban.
Experts predict that with cell culture on chips likely to become a reality in a couple of decades, animal testing will ultimately become redundant. Pro-ban activists argue that existing innovations with tissue cultures were enough to spare animals from wilful human rapaciousness. Some of them argue that all experiments are not fool-proof for in the end animal testing can just about indicate how targeted cells could react, considering the metabolism in animals is significantly different from that of human beings and several successful results on animals have not always translated into similar benefits among adults. They also argue that for the gains they make, pharma majors could work around cell-based methods rather than subjecting test cases with noxious restraint and denial procedures, leading to distress and death. Pro-testing lobbyists, on the other hand, argue that the very objective of path-breaking and life-saving research for all creatures on this planet — humans and animals alike — would be defeated if animal testing was to be banned completely.Most importantly, R&D wings of pharma majors would easily move their animal lab operations out of countries that ban them and farm them out to willing countries, often at lesser costs. It is this latter argument that is weighing heavily upon the EU. As for talk on actual human testing in a phased manner and within acceptable parameters of health, those arguing for continuity of animal testing say that humans in third world countries, like those in Africa, are anyway subjected to clandestine drug trials as life is as cheap as lab rats there. They also argue if activists of prevention of cruelty to animals would also by extension stop non-vegetarianism as they would involve kills and if they would not kill rodents in their home.
Though India is often perceived to be a country which is not animal-friendly, typified by visuals of abuse, policy-makers have been quick to embrace cruelty-free practices of testing despite the challenges of public health and research. Two years ago, it even ended re-testing of drugs on animals for new drug registrations. Well done.