01991nas a2200253   4500000000100000008004100001260003100042653002700073653001700100653002200117653003300139653002200172653002100194653002600215653002100241100002100262700002300283700002300306245012300329856007500452300001000527520117800537020002201715       2027                            d  c2027-01-01bAcademic Press10aanimal experimentation10aFunding bias10anonanimal methods10aPain and severity assessment10aRegulatory reform10aSurplus breeding10atranslational failure10aTransparency gap1 aKathrin Herrmann1 aCatharine E. Krebs1 aGail A. Van Norman00aChapter 4 - Systemic failures and suffering in animal-based research: Why a human-relevant paradigm is urgently needed  uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780443265143000084  a53-713 aAnimal experimentation is often portrayed as scientifically indispensable and ethically well policed; however, contemporary evidence indicates otherwise. This chapter identifies six systemic weaknesses within the current animal-research paradigm: (1) sustained high animal use and large “surplus” killings in breeding colonies; (2) routine under estimation and under treatment of pain; (3) selective transparency that omits≈95% of US laboratory animals and keeps harm–benefit and retrospective assessments confidential; (4) public-funding bias that allocates≤1% of health-research budgets to human-biology-based nonanimal methods (NAMs); (5) welfare and translational shortcomings driven by barren housing, chronic stress, and interspecies differences; and (6) fragmented regulatory oversight characterized by low refusal rates and limited accountability. Severe procedures now cluster in neuroscience, high-dose viral challenge, and fish ecotoxicity, while≈90% of drug candidates that appear promising in animals fail in human trials. A decisive pivot to human-relevant science is both an ethical imperative and a strategic investment in biomedical innovation.  a978-0-443-26514-3