Philosophy of AR >
Animal Testing - Index >
May 14, 2005
The study is on mice and the findings cannot be extrapolated to humans
Please read this article on the BBC News website 3 May - Health section. It
talks about experiments on mice and then goes on to say:
"But experts urged people not to be alarmed and said there was no clear
evidence of such problems in humans."
Dr Richard Sharpe, from the Medical Research Council Human Reproductive
Sciences Unit in Edinburgh, said: "This is not showing that there is an
effect on prostate cancer or prostate disease in adults.
"The study is on mice and the findings cannot be extrapolated to humans. The
mouse is not a good model for the human in this case.
"During pregnancy, women produce a lot of estrogen so babies are exposed to
this naturally. This does not happen in mice."
Why did they do these experiments on mice then?
Perhaps you would like to ask.
** Concerns over 'female chemicals' **
Chemicals in oral contraceptives and food containers harm unborn baby mice
raising concerns about the effects in humans, say scientists.
Animal experiments have:
a 63% failure rate when detecting human carcinogens
a 75-95% failure rate for detecting drug side effects
a 70% failure rate for detecting drugs which cause birth defects
Success rates lower than those achieved by uneducated guesswork.
This is not science!!
See more at
(unreliability of vivisection)
Vivisection Information Network (VIN).
Providing the evidence for abolition.