A brave new future for science beyond traditional animal models

raise your hand

if someone you know has suffered with

alzheimer’s

how about heart disease

cancer

stroke

that’s a lot of hands

the standard approach for tackling

diseases like this is to use

animal models for drug discovery and

testing

but what if i told you that 95

of drugs tested in animals actually fail

in humans biomedical research

is in a translation crisis but how did

we get here

i’m elizabeth ormandy and i’ve spent the

last 15 years

unraveling our animal-based science

systems

what i’ve come to learn is that we need

to change the way science is taught

practiced and regulated

today i invite you to come on a journey

that explores

the persistent use of animal models why

they are failing

and what we can do and it all starts

way back in your childhood with a

science education practice

that at first glance might seem

unrelated

now raise your hand if you did animal

dissection

in your school science classes

most of you and so our story begins

there is a deeply held assumption that

traditional animal dissection is the

best way

to learn anatomy and body systems so

dissection remains prevalent

in our schools and universities however

there is compelling evidence to show

that

non-animal teaching methods like virtual

anatomy tools

are better for education less costly

for school budgets safer and more

inclusive for students

and they’re the greener option in terms

of their environmental impact

they are also the ethical option

and here’s why there are three

principles that guide

the ethical use of animals in science

and science education and they’re called

the three

r’s replacement reduction refinement

i’m going to zero in on replacement for

a moment

this principle tells us that if we can

meet our scientific

or educational goals without using

animals

it is an ethical obligation to use

non-animal methods

empirical data from the last 15 years

shows that 90 of students

do just as well and in most cases

better when they use non-animal teaching

methods compared

to dissection so under the principle of

replacement

dissection should have ended 10 years

ago case closed

but here’s the rub science teachers are

not taught about the three r’s

in their teacher training programs and

students are not taught about the three

r’s

in early science education so

the harmful and unnecessary practice of

dissection

persists so we need to change

how science is taught in two key ways

first by ending the unnecessary practice

of dissection

second by making sure that the three r’s

are taught and adhered to

in early science education and by doing

so

i think that we can avoid scenes like

this

where animal life is taken for no

discernible educational benefit

and what’s more this animal life is

being disrespected

instead i believe that we can raise a

generation of young scientists

who are encouraged to lean into the

natural

empathy and compassion that they have

for animals

rather than being asked to dissociate

themselves from these qualities in the

name of science

so in 2018 i established canada’s first

humane science education program

this program teaches k-12 life science

education

including internal anatomy without using

a single

real animal and here’s what humane

science education looks like

we use virtual anatomy tools these

beautiful

paper dissections plastic anatomy models

and augmented and virtual reality

technology

but what does any of this have to do

with the failure of animal models in

drug development

well i’ve come to learn that it’s all

about the prevailing

science culture

i want you to imagine that you are back

in grade six you’ve just done a frog

dissection and you were kind of grossed

out

but your scientific curiosity won the

day

fast forward to grade 12 and this time

you want to opt out of doing the fetal

pig dissection

but your teacher strongly encourages you

to take part

she knows that you want to go on and do

biology at university

so you do dissection for the second time

you go on to your chosen undergraduate

degree then a master’s degree

and a phd all the while

you carry with you an implicit

assumption

that the right way the best way to do

science is to kill animals and take them

apart

no one along the way challenges that

assumption

and in fact since grade six you’ve been

taught that animal models are the gold

standard and that using them in science

is a necessary evil

you are now a lead principal

investigator

you have your own lab you’re studying

alzheimer’s and you’re using

mice for research and drug development

you get government grants you test one

experimental drug

after another you kill hundreds of mice

time passes five years

ten years fifteen

you make no new breakthroughs

animal models of alzheimer’s fail close

to 100

of the time and in fact data from a

range of different biomedical

disciplines studying sepsis stroke

multiple sclerosis hiv aids heart

disease

depression asthma cancer and so on

show that on average 95

of drugs tested in animals go on to fail

in human clinical trials 95

think of all those tax dollars all those

animals all those

failed patients for few to no

new treatments

since grade six you’ve been taught that

animal models are the gold

standard in science

they’re not they’re failing us

but why well there are two

main reasons the first relates to sloppy

science practices

the second relates to insurmountable

species differences

so let me talk about sloppy science for

a minute

there’s a phenomenon called confirmation

bias

and this describes a tendency to seek

out

or give greater weight to data points

that confirm

hypotheses there are two

important experimental techniques for

avoiding

confirmation bias and they’re called

randomization

and blinding in the context of

animal-based research

randomization is when researchers

randomly allocate

animals to different treatment groups

blinding

is when researchers do not know which

animal received which treatment

now there is evidence to show that

researchers who

use animal models for drug development

in many cases are not using

randomization

and blinding so they’re not controlling

for confirmation bias

what this means is that in studies with

no randomization

and no blinding there is a significant

and inaccurate overestimate of the

clinical effect of a drug

researchers are finding their desired

clinical

outcome where there is none because they

did not control for confirmation bias

and it is inaccurate data like this that

is used to make decisions

about whether novel drugs are advanced

to clinical trials in humans and in many

cases

ineffective drugs are permitted to

proceed

now this is not a new-found phenomenon

this has been well documented

since at least the late 1990s

but despite this particular sloppy

science practice being highlighted

more than two decades ago a report from

just this year showed that more than 90

percent of animal studies

exploring new drugs for covert 19

failed to report blinding

so we really need to change our science

practices and make sure

that experimental techniques to control

bias are used

every single time

lives quite literally depend on it

the second and most important reason

that animal models fail

is because animals often don’t make good

stand-ins for humans

so even if we did the most rigorous

animal-based studies with all the

randomization and all the blinding

in many cases species differences simply

cannot be overcome

so what can we do then if animals

don’t make good models for human biology

well there are groundbreaking human

relevant

non-animal methods that are being

developed and they overcome

species differences by using human cells

and human tissues that can be collected

non-invasively and with consent

and i have a few favorites to share with

you

organs on a chip this is the lung on a

chip developed

at harvard’s vice institute and the

channels in the chip

have living human lung cells on one side

and capillary blood vessel cells

on the other so despite appearances

the chip mimics functional human lung

tissue

this device has been used to identify

new disease biomarkers

and it can be used to develop new

treatments for conditions like chronic

obstructive pulmonary disorder

and asthma and there are other chips

heart on a chip liver on a chip

blood-brain barrier

on a chip and there are researchers who

are linking chips together

to observe multi-system effects in human

cells and human tissues

there are organoids these are miniature

functional organ units that grow

into 3d spherical shapes

the ones pictured here are brain

organoids and they’ve been used by

researchers to better understand autism

and schizophrenia most recently

brain organoids were used to explore the

neurobiological impact

of covid19

and there are other organoids intestinal

kidney ovarian and many more

this is a 3d bioprinter it works much

the same as the 3d

printers that you’re probably more used

to the ones that use plastic polymers

but instead bioprinters use something

called bioink

which contains human cells so as it

prints

cells are layered and they can be

printed into

3d functional human tissue

3d bioprinters have been used to print

small sections

of human trachea that’s the windpipe to

study

chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder

they’ve been used to print neural tissue

to study neurodegenerative disorders

and to study spinal cord injury

and there are many more applications as

well

relevant non-animal technologies like

these are changing the shape of

changing the face of science in profound

ways however they are not being taught

to our undergraduate science students in

any meaningful

or systematic way i wanted to change

that

so i created and now teach canada’s

first

undergraduate science course that is

fully focused on non-animal methods in

biomedical science

and my hope is that talented young

scientists will carry this knowledge

forward

and will shift their own science

practices in favor of non-animal methods

progress on the development and

adoption of non-animal technologies is

being made primarily in countries that

have

a legislative foundation governing the

use of animals in science

so for example in the european union

all eu member states answer to the eu

directive

on the protection of animals used for

scientific purposes

that directive is very clear that the

ultimate goal

is the replacement of animals in science

in canada we have no such legislation

and i firmly believe that this lack of a

legislative framework

is hindering some much-needed progress

here

so we need to change how animal-based

science is governed

and move towards a legislated system one

which

prioritizes non-animal methods by

codifying replacement into law

but one that also ensures that any

remaining animal-based science is held

to much more rigorous standards than we

are currently seeing and i’m deeply

committed to being on the forefront of

that conversation

so to recap we need to change science

education

we need to end the unnecessary practice

of dissection we need to make sure that

the three r’s are taught and adhered to

in early science education and we need

to make sure that our undergraduate

students are being taught about

non-animal methods

we need to change how science is

practiced

and include much more rigorous

experimental design in animal studies

but most importantly make sure that

non-animal methods are being made top

priority and that starts with our

research funders

and we need to change how animal-based

science is regulated and move towards a

legislative system

in 2015 together with some incredible

colleagues we co-founded canada’s first

charity that works solely on the issues

that i’ve presented here today

we are called the society for humane

science

and i could not be more proud of the

work that we do

in my closing moments with you i want to

leave you with this

even though you may never have

heard about these issues before they

affect you and you’re part of them

through everything from

the taxes that you pay which fund animal

research

to the medical or chemical products that

you purchase or interact with on a daily

basis

to the loved ones you’ve lost because of

failed animal experiments

and i know that pain well i’ve lost them

too

my hope here today is that i’ve inspired

you

to research these issues for yourself to

get curious about science education and

how drugs are developed

and to start exercising your voice where

you can

because we are called on to do nothing

short of changing science culture

and while there is indeed a growing

global movement

that seeks to achieve better science

without animals we cannot do that

without collective political will

i can’t do that without you

thank you

如果你认识的人患有

阿尔茨海默氏

,请举手 心脏病 癌症 中风 很多手

解决

此类疾病的标准方法是使用

动物模型进行药物发现和

测试,

但如果我告诉你 95 种药物怎么办?

在动物身上测试实际上

在人类身上失败了生物医学研究

正处于翻译危机中,但

我们是如何到达这里的,

我是伊丽莎白·奥曼迪,在

过去的 15 年里,我一直在

解开我们以动物为基础的科学

系统

,我学到的是 今天,我们

需要改变教授科学

实践和规范科学的方式,

我邀请您踏上一段旅程

,探索

动物模型的持续使用为什么

它们会失败

以及我们能做些什么,这一切都

始于您童年时代的

科学

乍一看似乎

无关的教育实践

现在举起你的手,如果你们大多数人

在学校科学课上做过动物解剖

,所以我们的故事

开始了 根深蒂固的假设,即

传统的动物解剖是

学习解剖学和身体系统的最佳方式,因此

解剖

在我们的学校和大学中仍然很普遍,但是

有令人信服的证据

表明,

像虚拟解剖工具这样的非动物教学

方法更适合教育,成本

更低 学校预算对学生来说更安全,更具

包容性

,就环境影响而言,它们是更环保的选择,

它们也是道德的选择

,这就是为什么在科学和科学教育

中指导

动物的道德使用的三个原则

,它们是

称为三个

r 的替换减少改进,

我暂时将替换归零

这个原则告诉我们,如果我们能够

不使用动物的情况下实现我们的科学或教育目标,

那么使用来自

非动物方法的

经验数据是一种道德义务 过去 15 年

表明,90 名学生的成绩

一样好,而且在大多数情况下

更好 n 与解剖相比,他们使用非动物教学

方法

,因此根据替换原则,

解剖应该在 10

年前结束,

但这里的摩擦科学教师

在他们的教师培训计划中没有教过三个 r,

学生也没有教过

早期科学教育中的三个 r,

因此有害和不必要的解剖实践

仍然存在,因此我们需要

以两个关键方式改变科学的教学方式,

首先结束不必要

的解剖实践,

其次确保

教授并遵守三个 r

在早期科学教育中,通过这样

做,

我认为我们可以避免这样的

场景,即为了没有

明显的教育利益

而夺取动物生命,而且这种动物生命

受到不尊重,

相反,我相信我们可以培养出

一代年轻的科学家

,他们是 鼓励他们倾向于对动物的

自然

同理心和同情心,

而不是被 要求以科学

的名义摆脱这些品质,

因此在 2018 年,我建立了加拿大第一个人文

科学教育计划,

该计划教授 k-12 生命科学

教育,

包括内部解剖学,而不使用

单一的

真实动物,这就是人文

科学教育看起来像

我们 使用虚拟解剖工具这些

漂亮的

纸解剖塑料解剖模型

以及增强和虚拟现实

技术

但这

与动物模型在

药物开发中的失败有什么

关系我已经了解到这一切都

与流行的

科学文化有关

我想让你想象一下,你回到

了六年级,你刚刚做了一次青蛙

解剖,你有点

恶心,

但是你的科学好奇心赢了

一天,

快进到 12 年级,这次

你想选择不做 胎

猪解剖,

但你的老师强烈鼓励

你参加,

她知道你想继续做

生物学 在大学里,

所以你第二次进行解剖,

然后继续攻读所选的本科学位,然后是硕士学位

和博士学位,同时

你一直带着一个隐含的

假设

,即做科学的最好方法

是杀死动物和 把它们

拆开

一路上没有人挑战这个

假设

,事实上,从六年级开始,你就被

教导动物模型是黄金

标准,在科学中使用它们

是必要的邪恶

你现在是首席首席

研究员

你有你自己的 实验室 你正在研究

阿尔茨海默病 你正在使用

老鼠进行研究和药物开发

你获得政府资助 你测试一种又一种

实验药物

你杀死了数百只老鼠

时间过去了五年

十年十五

你没有取得新

的突破 阿尔茨海默病动物模型失败

近 100

个时间和事实上的数据来自

一系列不同的生物医学

学科研究败血症中风

多发性硬化 HIV 艾滋病

心脏病 e

抑郁症 哮喘 癌症 等等

表明平均有 95

种在动物身上测试的药物

在人体临床试验中失败了 95

想想所有那些税金 所有那些

动物 所有那些

失败的病人 自六年级以来几乎没有

新的治疗方法

你 一直被教导

动物模型是科学的黄金

标准,

它们

并没有让我们失望,但为什么有两个

主要原因,第一个与草率的

科学实践

有关,第二个与无法克服的

物种差异有关,

所以让我谈谈草率的科学 有

一分钟,

有一种现象称为确认

偏差

,这描述了一种倾向于寻找

或给予更大权重的数据点

来确认

假设有两种

重要的实验技术

可以避免

确认偏差,它们在动物的背景下被称为

随机化

和盲法

基于研究的

随机化是指研究人员

将动物随机分配

到不同的

治疗组 研究人员不知道哪种

动物接受了哪种治疗

现在有证据表明,

在许多情况下使用动物模型进行药物开发的研究人员没有使用

随机化

和盲法,因此他们没有

控制确认偏差

这意味着在研究中 在

没有随机化

和盲法的情况下,

药物

的临床效果被严重且不准确

地高估

就是否将新药

推进人体临床试验做出决定,在许多

情况下

,现在允许进行无效药物,

这不是一个新发现的现象

,至少自 1990 年代后期以来,这已被充分记录,

但尽管这种特别草率的

科学实践

二十多年前就被强调了,今年的一份报告

显示 超过 90

% 的

为隐蔽 19 探索新药的动物研究

未能报告致盲,

因此我们真的需要改变我们的科学

实践,并

确保每次都使用控制偏见的实验技术,

这实际上

取决于第二次和

动物模型失败的最重要原因

是因为动物通常不能很好

地代替人类,

所以即使我们进行了最严格

的基于动物的研究,在许多情况下进行了

所有的随机化和盲法

,物种差异根本

无法克服

那么如果动物

不能很好地为人类生物学建立良好的模型,

那么我们能做些什么呢? 正在开发开创性的与人类

相关的

非动物方法,它们

通过使用

可以非侵入性收集的人体细胞和人体组织来克服物种差异

经同意

,我有一些最喜欢的可以与您分享

芯片上的器官这是哈佛开发的芯片上的肺

副研究所和

芯片中的通道

一侧有活的人肺细胞,另一侧

有毛细血管

细胞,因此尽管

该芯片模仿功能性人肺

组织,但

该设备已被用于识别

新的疾病生物标志物

,并且可以用于 为

慢性

阻塞性肺疾病

和哮喘等疾病开发新的治疗方法,还有其他芯片 芯片上的

心脏 芯片上的肝 芯片上的

血脑屏障

有研究人员

正在将芯片连接在一起,

以观察人体的多系统效应

细胞和人体组织

有类器官 这些是微型

功能性器官单元,可以长

成 3d

球形 图中是大脑类

器官,研究人员已经使用它们

来更好地了解自闭症

和精神分裂症 最近,

大脑类器官被用于探索

神经生物学

covid19 的影响

,还有其他类器官 肠道

肾脏 卵巢 等等

这是一款 3d 生物打印机,它的工作原理

与 3d 打印机非常相似

,您可能更

习惯于使用塑料聚合物的打印机,

但生物打印机使用一种

叫做 bioink 的东西

,其中包含人体细胞,因此它

打印的

细胞是分层的,它们可以是

打印到

3d 功能性人体组织中

3d 生物打印机已被用于打印

作为气管的人体气管的小部分以

研究

慢性阻塞性肺疾病

它们已被用于打印神经组织

以研究神经退行性疾病

和研究脊髓损伤,

并且有许多 更多的应用以及

像这样的相关非动物技术

正在

以深刻的方式改变科学的面貌,

但是它们并没有以任何有意义或系统的方式教授

给我们的本科理科学生,

我想改变

它,

所以我创造了 现在教授加拿大

第一

完全专注于非动物方法的

本科科学课程 医学科学

,我希望有才华的年轻

科学家能够将这些知识发扬光大

,并将他们自己的科学

实践转变为有利于非动物方法

的发展和

采用非动物技术

的进展主要在

拥有立法的国家取得 管理

在科学中使用动物的基金会

,例如在欧盟,

所有欧盟成员国都对欧盟

关于保护用于科学目的的动物的指令做出回应,

该指令非常明确,

最终目标

是在科学中替代动物

加拿大 我们没有这样的立法

,我坚信缺乏

立法框架

正在阻碍这里一些急需的进展

因此我们需要改变以动物为基础的

科学的管理方式,

并朝着

优先考虑非动物方法的立法体系迈进 通过

将替代法编入法律,

但同时也确保任何

剩余的以动物为基础的科学

比我们目前看到的更严格的标准

,我

坚定地致力于站在对话的最前沿

所以回顾一下,我们需要改变科学

教育,

我们需要结束不必要

的解剖实践,我们需要确保

在早期科学教育中教授并遵守三个 r

,我们

需要确保我们的

本科生学习

非动物方法

我们需要改变科学

实践的方式,

在动物研究中包括更严格的实验设计,

但大多数 重要的是确保

非动物方法被

放在首位,这从我们的

研究资助者开始

,我们需要改变基于动物的

科学的监管方式,并

在 2015 年与

我们共同创立的加拿大的一些令人难以置信的同事一起迈向立法体系 第一个

仅针对我今天在这里介绍的问题开展工作的慈善机构,

我们被称为人文科学协会

,我 对我们

在与你的最后时刻所做的工作感到无比自豪我想把

这个留给你,

即使

在这些问题影响你之前你可能从未听说过这些问题,

而且你是其中的一部分,

从税收开始 你把动物研究的资金支付

你每天购买或与之互动的医疗或化学产品

给你因为

动物实验失败

而失去的亲人,我很清楚这种痛苦我也失去了他们

我的希望 今天在这里,我启发

自己研究这些问题,

以对科学教育

和药物的开发方式产生好奇,

并开始在可能的地方行使你的声音,

因为我们被要求除了

改变科学文化之外别无他法

,同时 确实有越来越多的

全球

运动寻求在

没有动物的情况下实现更好的科学我们无法做到

没有集体的政治意愿

我无法做到没有你

谢谢你