Friday, April 28, 2023
Monday, April 24, 2023
#animals #animalsofinstagram #cuteanimals #buzzfeedanimals #loveanimals #veganfortheanimals #wildanimals #babyanimals #animalsco #splendid_animals #igcutest_animals #funnyanimals #iloveanimals #instaanimals #animalsmood #animals_in_world #farmanimals #stuffedanimals #animalsaddict #saveanimals #animalslover #savetheanimals #animalshelter #partyanimals #animals_captures #animalsofig #amazing_picturez_animals #fortheanimals #adorableanimals #exclusive_animals #animalshots #ic_animals #animalstyle #noanimalsharmed #animalsanctuary #marvelouz_animals #rescueanimals #animalsinfluence #bekindtoanimals #exoticanimals
Wednesday, April 19, 2023
YoutubeChannel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvkycyGjQDsLEBaCoeQe6Kg
Visit: https://veterinary-conferences.pencis.com/
YouTubeChannel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvkycyGjQDsLEBaCoeQe6Kg
#art #katze #kittycat #cutecats #adoptdontshop #catloversclub #instagood #lovecats #catphoto #photography #blackcat #petstagram #dogs #catsagram #ilovemycat #photooftheday #nature #neko #catsofig #gatto #dogsofinstagram #catofinstagram #instacats #follow #catphotography #like #kedi #britishshorthair #k #caturday
YouTubeChannel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvkycyGjQDsLEBaCoeQe6Kg
#cat #catsofinstagram #cats #catstagram #kitty #love #catlover #kitten #instacat #meow #cute #catoftheday #cats_of_instagram #pet #dog #pets #photooftheday #instagood #kittens #photography #catlovers #animals #animal #catlife #adoptdontshop #nature #petstagram #cats_of_world #kittycat
You Tube Channel :https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvkycyGjQDsLEBaCoeQe6Kg
#cat #cats #catsofinstagram #of #catstagram #catlover #catlife #instagram #catlovers #kitten #instacat #kitty #pet #cute #love #meow #dog #catoftheday #pets #kittens #gato #animals #catlove #animal #cutecat #world #gatos #petsofinstagram #kittensofinstagram #chat
YouTubeChannel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvkycyGjQDsLEBaCoeQe6Kg
#cat #catsofinstagram #cats #catstagram #kitty #love #catlover #kitten #instacat #meow #cute #catoftheday #cats_of_instagram #pet #dog #pets #photooftheday #instagood #kittens #photography #catlovers #animals #animal #catlife #adoptdontshop #nature #petstagram #cats_of_world #kittycat
Study shows antibiotic-resistant 'superbugs' are being passed between dogs and cats and their owners
YouTubechannel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvkycyGjQDsLEBaCoeQe6Kg
#cat #catsofinstagram #vacation #cats #catstagram #instacat #catlover #dedication #catoftheday #catlovers #cats_of_instagram #education #ilovemycat #catsagram #lovecats #catlife #blackcat #cutecat #catlove #catering #kittycat #instacats #caturday #vacations #instagramcats #catalunya #bestvacations #ilovecats #catsofig #cats_of_world #mycat #cutecats #vacationmode #ducati #catlady #cathedral #crazycatlady #panicatthedisco #cat_features #dreamcatcher
Why pandemic researchers are talking about raccoon dogs
It caught the attention of Florence Débarre, a researcher who works at CNRS, the French national research agency.
After quickly downloading the data, an international team of researchers from Europe, North America and Australia conducted an analysis and uncovered key details about how the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic may have began. They published their findings in a report this week.
Katherine J. Wu, science writer at The Atlantic, broke the story. She talks to Short Wave co-host Emily Kwong about this new analysis — the strongest evidence yet on the pandemic's natural origins — what questions remain and why the genetic material of raccoon dogs being found in the mix matters.
As a scientific endeavor, virus hunting takes years. Data transparency is paramount, and officials in China have been resistant to sharing information. The origins of the 2002-2004 SARS outbreak weren't known for a decade. You can listen to Emily's 2020 conversation with Dr. Lin-Fa Wang about this SARS outbreak — referenced in this episode — here.
YouTubeChannel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvkycyGjQDsLEBaCoeQe6Kg
#dog #dogsofinstagram #dogs #dogstagram #instadog #doglover #dogoftheday #ilovemydog #frenchbulldog #doglovers #doglife #dogsofinsta #doggy #dogs_of_instagram #doggo #lovedogs #bulldog #rescuedog #instagramdogs #dogsofig #mydog #doglove #instadogs #cutedog #dogsofinstaworld #dogslife #happydog #rescuedogsofinstagram #dogsitting #cutedogs #dogmom #englishbulldog #lovemydog #nationaldogday #dogphotography #doggie #dogsofinstgram #bulldogsofinstagram #dogscorner #ilovedogs
You Tube Channel : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvkycyGjQDsLEBaCoeQe6Kg
#dog #dogsofinstagram #puppy #dogs #love #cute #dogstagram #instadog #doglover #dogoftheday #pet #instagood #puppies #photography #puppiesofinstagram #puppylove #nature #photooftheday #doggo #pets #travel #happy #art #petstagram #ilovemydog #doggy #instagram #beach #beautiful #animals
Dogs have an acute sense of smell. This could prove useful in the medical world, as researchers are finding that dogs can sniff out the markers of breast, colorectal, lung, and other types of cancer.
Humans have put dogs’ remarkable sense of smell to use by training them to sniff out explosives and narcotics. Their powerful noses can also detect viruses, bacteria, and signs of cancer in a person’s body or bodily fluids.
In this article, we look at the evidence behind dogs’ abilities to smell and identify different types of cancer, and how medical professionals can use dogs to help diagnose the condition.
Can dogs smell cancer?
Research suggests that dogs can detect many types of cancers in humans.
Like many other diseases, cancers leave specific traces, or odor signatures, in a person’s body and bodily secretions. Cancer cells, or healthy cells affected by cancer, produce and release these odor signatures. They detectTrusted Source these odors in substances called volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
Depending on the type of cancer, dogs are able to detect VOCs in a person’s:skin
Dogs can detect these odor signatures and, with training, alert people to their presence. People refer to dogs that undergo training to detect certain diseases as medical detection dogs.
Trained dogs can detect some substances in very low concentrations, as low as parts per trillion, which makes their noses sensitive enough to detect cancer markers in a person’s breath, urine, and blood.
Which types of cancer can a dog smell?
Research has shown that dogs can detect many types of cancer, such as:
For example, one case reportTrusted Source describes how a 75-year-old man visited a doctor after his dog licked persistently at a lesion behind the man’s ear.
The doctor performed diagnostic tests and confirmed malignant melanoma.
Nobody had trained this person’s dog specifically to detect cancer. However, most research studies into canine cancer detection involve teaching individual dogs to sniff out specific cancers.
Scientists have found evidence that some dogs can detect colorectal cancer from people’s breath and watery stool with high levels of accuracy, even for early-stage cancers. The presence of gut inflammation or noncancerous colorectal disease does not seem to affect dogs’ ability to detect these cancers.
Dogs may also detect lung cancer from a person’s breath. One studyTrusted Source found that a trained dog had a very high rate of accuracy in distinguishing between the breath of people with and without lung cancer.
In another studyTrusted Source, two dogs received training for 1 year. After this, researchers presented the dogs with a number of urine samples. The dogs proved 45–73% accurate in detecting lung cancer through the samples.
Dogs have also detectedTrusted Source ovarian cancer from blood samples and prostate cancer by sniffingTrusted Source a person’s urine.
In 2021, researchers reportedTrusted Source that a dog trained to detect signs of breast cancer in urine was able to detect breast cancer with 100% accuracy among urine samples from 200 people. Of these, 40 had breast cancer, 182 had other cancers, and 18 had no cancer. This study has yet to be repeated with a larger population of dogs to see if the outcomes can be reproduced.
One study found that dogs trained only to detect breast cancer were also able to detect melanoma and lung cancer. This suggests there may be a common odor signature across different types of cancer.
Visit: https://veterinary-conferences.pencis.com/
you Tube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvkycyGjQDsLEBaCoeQe6Kg
A team of osteoarchaeologists, archaeologists and veterinarian scientists from Istanbul University-Cerrahpaşa, Atatürk University, University of Environmental and Life Sciences, ul. Kożuchowska, has found evidence of early Romans breeding dogs with flat faces. In their study, reported in Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, the group examined the remains of a dog found in a tomb in what was once a city called Tralleis, in what is now modern Turkey.
The dog remains were found at a dig site in Aydın back in 2007, but were considered too delicate for study at the time—they were put in safe storage instead. In 2021, the team on this new effort retrieved the bones and began a slow study of the bones to learn more about the dog.
Though the specimen was not complete, the research team was still able to determine that it was a dog and that it had been treated well. Many dog remains have been found from Roman times, and because most were used as work animals, most were not well treated. The team identified the dog as a brachycephalic breed, a group that includes flat-faced dogs such as boxers, pugs and chow chows. The find was unique; only one other brachycephalic breed had ever been found before from a place in the Roman Empire, and that was in the ruins of Pompeii. It also marks the oldest known find of a brachycephalic anywhere, suggesting the Romans may have been the first to breed flat-faced dogs.
The research team was also able to deduce the dog's general size and found it to be smaller than they had expected. Carbon dating revealed it to be from between 1,942 and 2,118 years ago. Also, study of its teeth showed that it had barely made it to adulthood before dying. The team also compared the skull with several modern dog breeds and found it looked mostly like a French bulldog.
The researchers noted that the dog had been buried close to a human, who, they suggest, was likely its owner. This, they further suggest, indicates that the dog was likely killed and buried when its master died so that the two could be buried together.
You Tube Channel : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvkycyGjQDsLEBaCoeQe6Kg
#dog #dogsofinstagram #dogs #dogstagram #instadog #doglover #dogoftheday #ilovemydog #frenchbulldog #doglovers #doglife #dogsofinsta #doggy #dogs_of_instagram #doggo #lovedogs #bulldog #rescuedog #instagramdogs #dogsofig #mydog #doglove #instadogs #cutedog #dogsofinstaworld #dogslife #happydog #rescuedogsofinstagram #dogsitting #cutedogs #dogmom #englishbulldog #lovemydog #nationaldogday #dogphotography #doggie #dogsofinstgram #bulldogsofinstagram #dogscorner #ilovedogs
Saturday, April 15, 2023
If it seems as though everyone you know added a family member with fur, feathers or fins during the pandemic, the data show that you’re right: There are currently five million more pets in the U.S. than there were in 2019, with about 4% more households now including pets, according to Morgan Stanley Research and findings by its proprietary survey and data arm AlphaWise. The third AlphaWise survey of pet owners in June, which included approximately 2,500 adults in the U.S., shows that “fur babies” have found a permanent place in the hearts, and spending habits, of consumers across the country and world.
That is good news for the pet industry, and there's more growth to come: Morgan Stanley predicts an 8% compound annual growth rate for the industry by 2030, which is one of the largest rates of return in any retail segment. That forecast is in line with estimates from spring 2021, based on the October 2020 survey, and we still expect pet services to lead that growth. However, analysts have lifted the longer-term estimates for pet products spending.
On the household level, Morgan Stanley predicts spending to increase to $1,320 per pet by 2025, while reaching $1,897 by 2030. That compares with the previous outlook for per-pet spending of $1,292 by 2025 and $1,909 by 2030.
“An outcome in line with this expectation would increase total spending in the industry by 134% over the next decade, from $118 billion in 2019 to $277 billion by 2030,” says Simeon Gutman, an equity analyst covering hardline, broadline and food retail at Morgan Stanley.
YouTubeChannel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvkycyGjQDsLEBaCoeQe6Kg
#puppy #puppylove #instapuppy #puppyoftheday #puppygram #puppylife #cutepuppy #puppydog #nationalpuppyday #huskypuppy #goldenretrieverpuppy #frenchiepuppy #puppyeyes #corgipuppy #germanshepherdpuppy #sleepypuppy #dachshundpuppy #pitbullpuppy #gsdpuppy #pomeranianpuppy #pugpuppy #goldenpuppy #happypuppy #boxerpuppy #puppystagram #puppys #frenchbulldogpuppy #dailypuppy #beaglepuppy #puppypalace #bulldogpuppy #labradorpuppy #puppylover #mypuppy #puppyofinstagram #rottweilerpuppy #goldendoodlepuppy #shihtzupuppy #chihuahuapuppy #labpuppy
New York University has launched the Wild Animal Welfare Program, which will conduct research and host events that examine the impact of human activity and environmental change on the well-being of wild animals.
“The world contains a vast number and a wide diversity of wild animals,” says Becca Franks, a professor in NYU’s Department of Environmental Studies and co-director of the program. “Mammals, birds, fishes, molluscs, and many other animals live in complex, dynamic ecosystems. Human activity is increasingly impacting these ecosystems, along with all the animals within them. These realities raise important questions about wild animal welfare.”
“Most animal welfare research and policy focuses on domesticated animals, not wild animals,” adds Jeff Sebo, a professor in NYU’s Department of Environmental Studies and co-director of the program. “And most environmental research and policy focuses on species and ecosystems, not individuals. Yet the needs of individual wild animals are different from the needs of individual domesticated animals, as well as from the needs of species and ecosystems.”
Improving wild animal well-being, the co-directors observe, is difficult due, in part, to the complexity of natural systems and our limited knowledge. The NYU Wild Animal Welfare Program seeks to advance understanding about what wild animals are like, how humans and wild animals interact, and how humans can improve our interactions with wild animals.
In pursuing these aims, the program will conduct research in the humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences, as well as outreach to academics, advocates, policymakers, and the public. Its team will also include Arthur Caplan, director of the Division of Medical Ethics at NYU Grossman School of Medicine, and Danielle Spiegel-Feld, executive director of the Guarini Center on Environmental, Energy and Land Use Law at NYU School of Law.
“Trillions of wild animals suffer each year due to farming, fishing, deforestation, development, and other human activities, as well as rising temperatures, ocean acidification, extreme weather, ecosystem collapse, and other effects of human activities,” notes Sebo. “And of course, many wild animals also suffer due to illness, injury, and other natural causes, even when their habitats are well-preserved. Learning more about these issues will guide us toward policies that can be good for humans and wild animals at the same time.”
YouTubeChannel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvkycyGjQDsLEBaCoeQe6Kg
#animalwelfare #adoptdontshop #animals #animalrights #animalrescue #dogs #animallovers #dog #animallover #dogsofinstagram #animal #tierschutz #vegan #cats #rescue #wildlife #catsofinstagram #animalcruelty #cute #dontshopadopt #animalprotection #charity #adoptierenstattkaufen #rescuedog #saveanimals #bekindtoanimals #compassion #love #straydogs #govegan
Almost everything we know about biology we’ve learned from observing animals as biological systems. We keep them in cages, study their behavior, and, in many cases, analyze their tissues after they die. But animal research is a fraught topic within the scientific community and in the public sphere. Those who support animal research to solve problems affecting both human and animal health hold a variety of complicated, often strong beliefs. Supporters may diverge on how much and what kinds of animal research should be allowed—meaning what amount of oversight, regulation, and restriction should be involved, as well as what animals, experiments, and procedures are appropriate for certain questions. Many people who do support animal research to some extent may still have moral qualms.
On the extreme opposite end of the spectrum, some people and organizations are fundamentally opposed to animal research for any reason, under any circumstance. These organizations have historically led to direct harm, as well as serious threats of harm, against the people who do research on animals. “Scientists that work with animals have targets on their backs,” says Science editor David Grimm, who often covers animal research.
These very real threats have created an environment in which many animal researchers are reluctant to publicly share details about their work. This not only makes it difficult for journalists to cover stories that involve animal research but also ensures that extreme viewpoints are overrepresented in the media and in public discourse. Altogether, the situation deprives the public of opportunities to understand the nuances of biomedical research and contextualize science that affects their lives.
Reporting on this thorny subject requires journalistic rigor and compassion, sensitivity toward sources, and emphasis on the larger goals behind the research. But the extra effort will pay off in making your stories on animal research more nuanced and compelling.
Acknowledging a Complicated History
Nearly all biomedical advances are products of animal research. Without animal testing, including in nonhuman primates, we wouldn’t have deep brain stimulation treatments for Parkinson’s disease or vaccines against COVID-19. But research that aims to advance human health sometimes involves harming or killing animals.
In the U.S., the federal government began regulating animal welfare in the 1960s—millennia after animal testing was first documented. In 1966, Congress passed the Laboratory Animal Welfare Act, the first federal law regulating animal research by setting requirements for veterinary care and living conditions for certain lab animals. The law names dogs, cats, nonhuman primates, guinea pigs, hamsters, and rabbits, but excludes rats, mice, and birds, which comprise 95 percent of nonhuman research animals that are counted in such statistics (which often exclude some widely used invertebrates such as fruit flies).* The Public Health Service (PHS), United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), and the Association for Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care (AAALAC), as well as institution-specific self-regulatory bodies, cover animal-use protocols and research-animal breeding and testing.
Despite strict regulations governing the handling of animals used in research, some organizations, such as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), White Coat Waste, and the Animal Justice Project, continue to oppose animal research as a whole.
Anti-animal-research campaigns have taken many forms. While some organizations focus their efforts on outreach, government advocacy, and direct care for animals, others traffic in misinformation and sometimes even vandalism, harassment, or violence. Many of these groups often dominate the public narrative despite frequently promoting false and unproven claims. PETA has equated animal research with issues like human trafficking and rape, and some groups, such as White Coat Waste, claim that government-funded animal research is a waste of taxpayer money. In one of several similar attacks in the late 2000s, animal rights extremists targeted animal researchers at the University of California, Los Angeles, protesting outside their homes, sending death threats, and firebombing the car of neurobiologist David Jentsch, whose research on drug addiction at UCLA involved vervet monkeys. (Acts of violence in the name of animal rights are relatively uncommon, and other groups advocate for animal rights in more measured ways. For example, the Humane Society of the United States, the largest animal rights organization in the U.S., directs most of its efforts into political action and direct care for animals.)
In part because of the unethical approaches some activist groups have taken, researchers and institutions engaged in animal research tend to be wary of talking publicly about their work. “There are people who don’t want to speak at all about their science,” says Michele Basso, director of the Washington National Primate Research Center in Seattle. “They hide it, frankly, because they’re scared.”
This creates a catch-22: Many animal researchers are afraid to speak openly about their research, in part because they don’t think the public will understand; but no one will understand until they speak openly. “It’s understandable that the public feels like institutions are hiding something,” says Amanda Dettmer, senior editor at Speaking of Research, an animal-research advocacy organization. But, she says, “it’s also understandable that research institutions are once bitten, twice shy.”
Research-advocacy organizations like Americans for Medical Progress (AMP) and Understanding Animal Research encourage scientists to be proactively transparent about their work and push back against misinformation. Jim Newman, communications director at AMP, explains, “If you do this hard work to educate the public, then, even in difficult times, it’s easier for them to understand what you do and why.” After being attacked, UCLA’s Jentsch became a vocal pro-research advocate, realizing that “being open was the antidote to the harassment I was receiving.”
The public information officers (PIOs) I spoke with also emphasize to researchers that being up-front and presenting information about animal research in a neutral, accurate way is in everyone’s interest. It’s important for researchers to be frank and transparent about delicate matters such as euthanasia, they say, because the truth is almost always less sensational than the messaging from anti-animal-research groups.
YouTubeChannel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvkycyGjQDsLEBaCoeQe6Kg
Biomedical research seeks to understand human physiology and disease risk, as well as myriad biological processes in humans—from the genetic level on up. Biomedical research also informs drug development. Especially valuable findings may emerge from in vivo human studies. However, relying exclusively on human in vivo studies is neither morally ethical nor scientifically feasible. Often, scientists must turn to animal models. Drugs used to treat Alzheimer’s, cancer, diabetes, hepatitis B and C, HIV infection, Parkinson’s disease, leukemia, and various mental health conditions would not be available without animal research.1 This is only a shortlist. Indeed, 83% of Nobel Prizes awarded for “Outstanding Contributions to Medicine” since the award’s inception have involved using animals for research.
Mice, rats, minipigs, dogs, and nonhuman primates are some of the animals that play invaluable roles in developing drugs that support human health and well-being. Research that relies on animal studies has contributed to countless medical breakthroughs, and as technology and scientific knowledge stands today, the reliance on animal studies will not end soon. Nonetheless, scientists are increasingly concerned about animal welfare. They are looking for ways to continue their research while supporting a commitment to refining, reducing, and replacing animals in research.
Species selection 101
Regulatory guidelines typically require one rodent and one nonrodent species when testing drug candidates. However, these guidelines often accommodate exceptions. (For example, large molecule biotherapeutic candidates may be capable of engaging relevant targets in nonhuman primate models, but not in ordinary rodent models.) In any case, the species suitable for any given study will depend on several factors.
Investigators lean on drug metabolism and pharmacokinetic characteristics to determine which animal species to use. These (mostly) in vitro investigations try to identify similarities in reactions to test materials at the cellular level. For example, if compound X produces metabolite Y in a human being, it is essential to know which animal species produce the same metabolite.
Other critical dosing information is also derived from in vitro testing. For example, investigators need to know if biological mechanisms within certain species could potentially inhibit or increase absorption, thereby increasing human safety and/or toxicological concerns.
Physiological characteristics also contribute to species selection. Scientists know that physiologically, skin and heart of minipigs are more like those of human beings than are those of other species, making minipigs the best choice for testing dermally applied compounds or cardiac drugs. Similarly, a nonhuman primate’s immune system is closer to a human’s immune system than is a minipig’s or canine’s immune system; thus, nonhuman primates are frequently used in testing drugs that act on the immune system.
The bottom line is that investigators are deliberate when conducting animal and human testing. They employ a step-by-step process that applies lessons learned during testing—whether it involves in vitro studies or Phase I trials. The idea is to develop refined versions of the original tests, and then to run them on test populations in subsequent testing phases.
Respectful animal research
Drug development continues to require animal research, but all researchers now realize the importance of prioritizing animal welfare. Refinement of animal experiments is where big differences in welfare can be easily made by all researchers.
Housing and handling of animals has changed significantly in the last two decades, and refinements are introduced every day. Housing animals together (that is, group housing) is the global standard, but enclosures should be constructed based on the needs of the species that are being housed. The construction (materials) and dimensions (design and arrangement) of the enclosures must allow natural movement and behavior; enclosures that are too small or stacked to maximize capacity are unacceptable and contrary to animal welfare guidelines.
Multilevel or stratified enclosures may provide more natural environments for nonhuman primates or rodents, but the same cannot be said for dogs or minipigs. Likewise, gridded flooring may be helpful for maintaining hygiene, but it discourages natural movement and is quite uncomfortable for most animals. Having solid floors lined with sawdust or other absorbent materials is one way to soften the environment and support animal welfare.
Similarly, training staff to handle test animals in ways that minimize discomfort during testing is paramount. Training the animals to cooperate with the technician for a scientific procedure leads to a less stressful experience for both the animal and the technician. Reducing the number of invasive procedures is another way to reduce animal stress and improve animal welfare.
Let’s say a laboratory needs to conduct an experiment that requires multiple blood samples (an invasive technique) to track a compound over time. Instead of inserting a needle every 30 minutes, a catheter is inserted to aid in withdrawing blood as often as needed. That means 1 needle stick instead of 10.
There are also analytical techniques today that were not previously available. Identifying and monitoring certain biomarkers provides a clearer picture of the minuscule changes happening inside the organism, but at far lower dose levels than would be needed for these changes to be found via histology or necropsy. Animal welfare technicians who work with the animals daily are also ideally placed to recognize subtle, seemingly insignificant changes that a research scientist or investigator might miss. And enriching feeding time by creating foraging scenarios or providing frozen fruit can offer test animals additional stimuli and promote their natural behavior.
Researching with care and compassion is not only ethical, but also good science. The reality is that poor conditions can significantly impact data quality due to their physiological effects on animals. For example, stress can change cortisol levels, impact white blood cell counts, and inhibit food consumption, which can affect weight and behavior. Add a drug candidate to that scenario, and it has a knock-on effect.
Data derived from unhappy, stressed, or poorly treated animals will be inherently skewed as it does not reflect that animal’s normal physiology. This can significantly impact absorption, distribution, metabolism, and elimination data and call into question any safety/toxicological testing based on that data.
Visit : https://veterinary-conferences.pencis.com/
Drug development continues to require animal research, but all researchers now realize the importance of prioritizing animal welfare. Refinement of animal experiments is where big differences in welfare can be easily made by all researchers.
Housing and handling of animals has changed significantly in the last two decades, and refinements are introduced every day. Housing animals together (that is, group housing) is the global standard, but enclosures should be constructed based on the needs of the species that are being housed. The construction (materials) and dimensions (design and arrangement) of the enclosures must allow natural movement and behavior; enclosures that are too small or stacked to maximize capacity are unacceptable and contrary to animal welfare guidelines.
Multilevel or stratified enclosures may provide more natural environments for nonhuman primates or rodents, but the same cannot be said for dogs or minipigs. Likewise, gridded flooring may be helpful for maintaining hygiene, but it discourages natural movement and is quite uncomfortable for most animals. Having solid floors lined with sawdust or other absorbent materials is one way to soften the environment and support animal welfare.
Similarly, training staff to handle test animals in ways that minimize discomfort during testing is paramount. Training the animals to cooperate with the technician for a scientific procedure leads to a less stressful experience for both the animal and the technician. Reducing the number of invasive procedures is another way to reduce animal stress and improve animal welfare.
Let’s say a laboratory needs to conduct an experiment that requires multiple blood samples (an invasive technique) to track a compound over time. Instead of inserting a needle every 30 minutes, a catheter is inserted to aid in withdrawing blood as often as needed. That means 1 needle stick instead of 10.
There are also analytical techniques today that were not previously available. Identifying and monitoring certain biomarkers provides a clearer picture of the minuscule changes happening inside the organism, but at far lower dose levels than would be needed for these changes to be found via histology or necropsy. Animal welfare technicians who work with the animals daily are also ideally placed to recognize subtle, seemingly insignificant changes that a research scientist or investigator might miss. And enriching feeding time by creating foraging scenarios or providing frozen fruit can offer test animals additional stimuli and promote their natural behavior.
Researching with care and compassion is not only ethical, but also good science. The reality is that poor conditions can significantly impact data quality due to their physiological effects on animals. For example, stress can change cortisol levels, impact white blood cell counts, and inhibit food consumption, which can affect weight and behavior. Add a drug candidate to that scenario, and it has a knock-on effect.
Data derived from unhappy, stressed, or poorly treated animals will be inherently skewed as it does not reflect that animal’s normal physiology. This can significantly impact absorption, distribution, metabolism, and elimination data and call into question any safety/toxicological testing based on that data.
Visit : https://veterinary-conferences.pencis.com/
You Tube Channel : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvkycyGjQDsLEBaCoeQe6Kg
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
One Health. 2023 Jun 14;17:100580. doi: 10.1016/j.onehlt.2023.100580. eCollection 2023 Dec. ABSTRACT Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is on...
-
Scientists Produce First Calf Resistant to Major Viral Disease BVDV is one of the most significant viruses affecting the health and well-bei...