An episode and article of ‘Quirks and Quarks’, a CBC radio science show, has brought attention to the divisive discourse between animal research and new approach methodologies.  

New approach methodologies (NAMs), such as organoids, organs-on-a-chip and computer models, are valuable approaches that allow researchers to answer unique questions. However, animal research is required to answer different scientific questions, including understanding how a disease or drug affects a whole organism and how different organs interact. Michael Czubryt, from the University of Manitoba, who uses mice to study cardiovascular diseases after preliminary studies using cells, highlighted: “We haven't been able to replace the animals themselves but what we have been much better at, is doing preliminary studies in cells in dishes […] so that we can go in with a fairly educated guess as to whether we're going to be successful when we do move into an animal model,” adding: “I know that for the kinds of questions that we're asking at present this is the only way that we can do it as it stands right now.” 

Yet, the episode focuses on NAMs solely as a replacement for animals and highlights commonly spread misinformation that makes animal research accountable for the seemingly low translatability of drugs to human treatments, while ignoring the outstanding influence of clinical trial design, execution and other factors, including economic, on these numbers. It also features many instances of overpromising what NAMs can or would do if financing for these technologies was greatly increased. This view contributes to the polarisation of the discussion by presenting animals and NAMs as competing rather than complementary, and can be detrimental for scientific progress and development of new therapeutic solutions.  

Lucie Côté, veterinarian responsible for animal welfare at the Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre and president of the Canadian Association for Laboratory Animal Medicine, and also an EARA Member Delegate, participated in the episode and shared her views on the use of animals and other approaches in research: “I think the important point is that science should guide us; it shouldn't be politics or personal opinion.”