I promised myself I'd stay out of this debate, but here goes.

In spite of propaganda to the contrary, alternatives to animal testing are sort of a "holy grail" for pharma. They would like nothing more than to be able to culture a load of cells, dump some drug in them, and see how they respond, and have it mean something in terms of response in the whole organism (ie human being.)

There is a new technique being looked at called "microdosing" in which a very small amount of drug is given to a healthy person, and tests are done on the blood and urine to look at the metabolites. The technique requires very sensitive testing equipment. It shows much promise, but has to be validated, which means that the results have to be demonstrated to be "real".

The pharma industry, and even more importantly, the FDA, EMEA and other regulatory bodies are very conservative. It will be many years before we even know if microdosing has potential or is another dead end.

Meanwhile, while animal testing is done, the places that do it are obligated to care for the animals in as humane a manner is possible.