Technology and Animal Cruelty

Humanity has made massive strides in the understanding of ourselves and the world around us in the relatively little time we have been around on Earth. Our awareness of our own biological systems, our interaction with the environment, and the ways in which we have adapted to our surroundings by making use of the resources available to us reflect how mankind has been successful in using the intellect we were blessed with. While this curiosity and thirst for experimentation have allowed for civilisation to develop and for scientific advancement, there has been a very large price that animals have had to pay to help make this progress possible.

A large part of our understanding of biology and behaviour comes from studies conducted on animals. Also known as in vivo testing, animal testing involves studying the behaviour or systems of animals as a part of research conducted in establishments or institutions, either for the sake of knowledge or to apply the information gained in the production of goods or services. It dates back to ancient Greece; even Aristotle conducted experiments on living animals.

Although many of the procedures conducted on animals may claim to be harmless, they have the potential to cause psychological distress to these animals if not physical harm. The animals used for research may be killed at the end of it or reused for another study. But the danger lies in the procedure itself, as they are often exposed to chemicals and other substances or conditions that are experimental in nature and hence do not guarantee their safety. This includes cosmetics, food additives, cleaning chemicals, pharmaceutical drugs, or other chemicals, which are administered through force-feeding, injection, inhalation, or physical exposure.

The infliction of pain and recovery to study healing processes, water or food deprivation to study survival, prolonged captivity or restraint to study behavioural processes, and even genetic manipulation are just some of the ways in which animals have been used to further our knowledge of life and bodily functions. These methods demonstrate the horrific reality of animal cruelty that technological advancement has aided in.

Animal cruelty or abuse involves any kind of physical or psychological harm done to animals, ranging from neglect to intentional killing. It is a punishable offence, with a sentence of up to 2-3 years in India with a fine of up to one lakh rupees. Despite the severity of the punishment, it is still a very common occurrence seen nearly every day, especially in the treatment of stray animals in cities.

But animal cruelty need not always be as visible as these instances. As previously described, a lot goes on behind the scenes in places such as the research and testing sector where we may not even be aware of the involvement of animals. The Humane Society International estimates that around 115 million animals are used in research and testing worldwide each year. On a scale as large as this, the mass effects that animals face can hardly be figured, highlighting how urgent the need is for more ethical standards and procedures in research. Many countries, including India, have banned animal testing, especially for cosmetics, but the same is yet to be enforced in the remaining countries.

The need of the hour is safe alternatives to animal testing. These procedures put animals at risk to ensure that the products being delivered to us were safe for human use or consumption. This is a guarantee that consumers still require, so research must not turn to technology to figure out how to continue to test for safe human consumption without the use of animals in the process. This may even be more progressive for anthropocentric purposes as well since animal models don’t always reflect the biological systems and working of humans and hence do not always guarantee successful results. For example, the drug Thalidomide was successfully tested on animals in the 1950s and 60s without major side effects, but when administered to humans, it resulted in devastating birth defects. Research and testing now call for models closer to human anatomy and behaviour.

Fortunately, there have been many alternatives to the use of animals in research suggested by experts. One such strategy is that of the three Rs, suggested by Charles Hume and William Russell at the Universities Federation for animal welfares (UFAW) in 1957. The three Rs encompass the reduction in the total number of animals used in the procedure, the refinement of the procedure itself to ensure as little harm done to the animals being used as possible, and replacement wherever possible of animal subjects with lower organisms or alternative methodologies. This proposal was the first of many to suggest the replacement of animals in research with other elements.

Computer models and algorithms are some other alternatives suggested. Computational models can be fed data to analyse human biological structures which then calculate potential outcomes of a chemical or a substance or situation without it actually being administered to an animal or human. This process is much cheaper and very effective for studying the effects of chemicals as it uses known chemical structures to test for the effectiveness of unknown chemical structures by comparing similarities between the two. Similarly, a software known as Computer-Aided Drug Design (CADD) looks into the receptor binding sites of certain chemicals and can predict how effective a drug would be in a biological system – all without actual administration. These methods show promise in the research of pharmaceuticals and cosmetics.

Another alternative would be the use of in vitro cell and tissue cultures. Cells and tissues of animals are extracted and tested in laboratory settings without the involvement of the animal itself in the procedure. Once the cells or tissue have been extracted the animal is no longer a part of the research process as only the extracted material is tested upon to ensure the safety of chemicals or drugs. Some have even suggested the use of human cells tested under experimental conditions as they offer closer models to human biology than animals. As almost all marketed products are required to undergo research to ensure safe consumption and use, this also offers a relatively ethical and safe alternative to animal testing. However, it requires the extraction to be done carefully to ensure that the animals are not harmed in the process.

A glance at the label of a product near you might read “Cruelty-free”. This is a recent development of the animal-rights movement which seeks to abolish the use of animal testing by marketing products that don’t harm or kill animals in its research and testing phase of production. These products are a much more ethical choice as they do not endanger animals in the process of manufacture. However, as there is no legal definition for the term yet, companies may seek out loopholes to include their product under this category, such as testing the individual ingredients on animals instead of the product itself, testing on animals in a country outside its domain of manufacture, using animal-derived ingredients but not necessarily testing it on animals, or outsourcing to another company or institution to test the product on animals. Animal welfare organisations across the world often list the products that are truly cruelty-free, and these are excellent lists to be consulted to switch to more ethical consumerist behaviour.

Conscious choices like these are the best way to combat animal cruelty in the manufacturing sector today. While research in order to better understand human and animal functioning is essential, these alternatives prove that scientific progress does not have to continue to engender and harm animals, and that true scientific progress is reflected by more ethical standards and procedures. As the awareness about animal cruelty in research grows and the animal-rights movement continues to spread rapidly across the planet, we can hope for and act towards creating a world where the welfare of mankind goes hand-in-hand with the welfare of other living beings as well.