The government has unveiled its strategy for phasing out animal testing, detailing for the first time how it intends to deliver on its manifesto commitment.
The newly outlined plans include replacing animal testing for specific safety assessments by the end of the year and achieving a minimum 35% reduction in the use of dogs and non-human primates in tests for human medicines by 2030.
The Labour Party’s manifesto had pledged to “partner with scientists, industry, and civil society as we work towards the phasing out of animal testing”.
Science Minister Lord Vallance, speaking to BBC News, expressed his vision of a future where animal use in science is almost entirely phased out, while acknowledging the timeline required for such a transition.
Animal experiments in the UK reached a peak of 4.14 million in 2015, largely driven by an increase in genetic modification experiments, predominantly on mice and fish.
By 2020, this number had decreased significantly to 2.88 million as alternative methods were developed. However, the rate of decline has since plateaued.
Lord Vallance told BBC News that he aims to revitalize the downward trend by substituting animal testing with experiments involving animal tissues grown from stem cells, artificial intelligence (AI), and computer simulations.
When asked by BBC News if he foresaw a world with “near zero” animal tests, he responded: “I think that is possible, it’s not possible anytime soon. The idea that we can eliminate animal use in the foreseeable future, I don’t think is there.”
“Can we get very close to it? I think we can. Can we push faster than we have been? I think we can. Should we? We absolutely should.”
“This is a moment to really grasp that and drive these alternative approaches,” he stated.
The government’s newly detailed plans state that by the end of 2025, scientists will discontinue animal use for specific major safety tests, transitioning to newer lab methods that utilize human cells instead.
Given his background as a former government chief scientific advisor and head of research for a major pharmaceutical company, Lord Vallance is aware that many scientists consider reaching “near zero” animal tests as exceedingly difficult, even in the long term. This perspective includes those who are strong proponents of non-animal methods.
“I very strongly believe that that is not possible for reasons of safety,” stated Prof Frances Balkwill, of Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London.
Prof Balkwill is focused on discovering ways to prevent ovarian cancer recurrence, using mice in conjunction with non-animal approaches, of which she is an ardent supporter.
“These non-animal methods will never replace the complexity that we can see when we have a tumor growing in a whole organism, such as a mouse,” she explained.
One of the world’s leading centers for developing alternatives to animal testing is the Centre for Predictive in vitro Models (CPM) at Queen Mary University of London.
Researchers at the CPM are developing the novel “organ-on-a-chip” technology, which may conjure images of pulsating brains and beating hearts resting on electronic circuits.
However, the reality is less akin to science fiction.
The technology involves small pieces of glassware containing tiny samples of human cells from different organs in the body, such as the liver or brain, connected to electrodes that transmit information to a computer.
According to CPM’s co-director, Prof Hazel Screen, the remarkable aspect is that cells from various parts of the body can be connected to mimic how different organs interact.
“In theory, you can build any organ on a chip. Then I can use it to test a new drug,” she stated.
“And because we’re taking human cells, we should be able to do better quality science.”
The safety tests slated to discontinue animal use by the end of this year include the practice of administering a small dose of a new drug to rabbits – known as the pyrogen test. The government states that this will be replaced by a test using human immune cells in a dish.
The government also says that all tests using animals to check for dangerous germs in medicine will be conducted with cell and gene technologies instead.
Between 2026 and 2035, the government intends to accelerate the adoption of non-animal techniques, including organ-on-a-chip devices and artificial intelligence.
The proposals categorize animal tests into two main groups: those that can be immediately replaced due to the existence of safe and effective alternatives that simply require updated laws or guidelines, and others where alternatives exist but need further development to ensure reliability for widespread use.
To expedite the latter, the government plans to establish a Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods.
Ministers have also pledged an unspecified increase in funding and investment for developing new alternatives, including £30m for a research hub and more grants to support innovative methods and training.
The RSPCA has cautiously welcomed the plan, describing it as a “significant step forward,” while urging the government to deliver on its promises.
Some scientists working with animal experiments, such as Prof Robin Lovell-Badge, have expressed deep concern about what they perceive as a premature push toward alternatives and its potential adverse consequences for science and medicine.
“How about the brain and behavior? How can you study behavior in a petri dish? You just can’t,” he says.
“With complex areas of biology where no current non-animal model gets anything close to the real biology, how is forcibly pushing this strategy going to help?”