If not with animals,
how can we ever hope to cure cancer?
Cancer has now overtaken heart disease as the
number one killer in the UK. One major reason
we have not yet stemmed mortality from cancer
is this: animal cancer is not the same as human
cancer.
Cancer is not one disease. It is many. In humans,
there are over 200 different forms of cancer
afflicting different organs, tissues, and cells.
Though comparable animal organs, tissues, and
cells may become cancerous, the cancers are never
identical to human carcinomas.
Given substances are not necessarily carcinogenic
to all species. Studies show that 46% of chemicals
found to be carcinogenic in rats were not carcinogenic
in mice. [23]
If species as closely related as mice to rats
do not even contract cancer similarly, it's not
surprising that 19 out of 20 compounds that are
safe for humans caused cancer in animals. [24]
The US National Cancer Institute treated mice
growing 48 different "human" cancers
with a dozen different drugs proven successful
in humans, and in 30 of the cases, the drugs
were useless in mice. Almost two-thirds of the
mouse models were wrong. Animal experimentation
is not scientific because it is not predictive.
The US National Cancer Institute also undertook
a 25 year screening programme, testing 40,000
plant species on animals for anti-tumour activity.
Out of the outrageously expensive research, many
positive results surfaced in animal models, but
not a single benefit emerged for humans. As a
result, the NCI now uses human cancer cells for
cytotoxic screening.[25]
Dr. Richard Klausner, as director of the US
National Cancer Institute, plainly states:
"The history of cancer
research has been a history of curing cancer
in the mouse... We have cured mice of cancer
for decades - and it simply didn't work in
humans."
Next Question |
