Duvelthehobbit666
New Member
Cloning would seem to me way too expensive to aid in animal testing. If it is profitable, we would be doing it already. I see no pros in using cloning and the cons are expenses and a lack of genetic variety. Having genetic variety would increase the information gained because the results do not come from the same genetic subject. People react different to medicine so I would guess that animals do the same. We might bring a dangerous drug on the market because the animal tested might have a positive reaction or we might have a miss because an animal has a negative reaction.nemesiss said:
As for computer testing, it is too difficult as far as I know to have a good simulation. I do not know much about simulating biological systems but chemical systems require some effort. Single cell organisms aren't an option, they are too different. We do use tissues and similar things, however, we still need to do testing on live animals. A medication might bring positive results on a tissue sample but it might not have a positive reaction on the whole animal. It is very difficult to find alternatives to animal testing, and the fact that we don't use alternatives shows that it is not profitable yet to use these alternatives.
