Video Creator’s Channel BlazeTV

For 30 Years, Coleman Worked For The British Pharmaceutical

Giant UK developing drugs using both animal and non-animal testing methods. One had to choose your animal model very carefully to get results that you wanted and still there is no guarantee that once you’ve got results that you wanted the only relevant to clinical use potential clinical use of these of these compounds either in terms of their efficacy or indeed in terms of safety was there a particular turning point for you dr. Coleman where you came to the realization that you did no longer need animals for experimentation that you would solely rely on on human tissue. I think it was just a growing concern testing a particular you drunk in a rat gave a different result for that new guinea pig gave a different result from that of the dog so which one we’re going to.

• experimentation
• experiment
• efficacy
• testing
• pharmaceutical

Be Relevant To Human And It

occurred either potentially none of them, so it’s just a growing realization of the shortcomings of animals. In telling you what you don’t know and what’s the point of doing an experiment dot to get information on things you don’t know private industry tends to bring a product to the marketplace that people can consume on a broad scale, but they don’t necessarily have the ability to answer the very basic fundamental questions that need to be asked that’s where government-funded research projects come into play A problem is even the government itself. The UK itself admits that ninety-two percent of successful breakthroughs for treatments in drugs and animals fail. Ninety–two percent fail in humans once successfully passing animal.

Why Is It That Were Doubling Down Literally

and subsidizing stuff with a ninety-two percent failure rate? Why do you think the United States? Vested in animal testing, it’s an industry. There are people making money off animal experimentation academic institutions, lobbyists. It’s it’s an industry.

• uk developing drugs using animal
• did longer need animals experimentation
• testing particular drunk rat gave
• non animal testing methods choose
• concern testing particular drunk rat

Summary

Dr. Coleman worked for the British Pharmaceutical Giant UK developing drugs using both animal and non-animal testing methods . Coleman: “There is no guarantee that once you’ve got results that you wanted the only relevant to clinical use potential clinical use of these of these compounds could be relevant to human and it occurred either potentially none of them, so it’s just a growing realization of the shortcomings of animals,” he says . The UK admits that ninety-two percent of successful breakthroughs for treatments in drugs and animals fail. Ninety–two percent fail in humans once successfully passing animal.& Why do you think the U.S. Vested in animal testing, it’s an industry.& There are people making money off animal experimentation academic institutions, lobbyists, lobbyists.& It’s it’s the industry. The UK itself admits that 90% of successful break-throughs for drugs and animal failures fail. The U.K. acknowledges that 90-second percent of breakthroughs in animals fail ….. Click here to read more and watch the full video