People complain about the use of animals in research, but people working with animals need special permissions and ethical approval and this involves consideration for the 3Rs. In addition each year the number of animals you use need to be recorded and reported.
However, there is a massive misleading fudge and this if from the people who use animal cells in cell culture. Because you are not doing anything to the animal in life, it goes unreported in UK and you don’t need special licences and you don’t need ethics.
Therefore thousands upon thousands of animals are used and worse, is especially for neuroscience, they use pregnant females to get foetuses to make nerves because they grow in culture at that young age and this is where a lot of the oligodendrocyte stuff is done. A lot is done with rats cells
Surprised? So am I, but this is the fudge the Home office has concockted to look like fewer animals are used.
So if you want to cut animal useage drastically, you make these studies to get ethics and on ethical grounds the majority of studies will fail.
Why, because in this day and age, you don’t need animals to make cells. You can grow them from stem cells and you can use human cells.
So why bother using animals cells to study human biology?
Yes it may cost more but you can’t use the cost argument in most cases.
IPSC cells are inducible stem cells, you can make them from any cell with a set of transcription factors that make certain genes active. In this study they use a viral vector to produce these factors and can be used to make motor nerves,
So why use animals to make nerves.