animo-aequoanimo

youpssssssss.... j'ai cliqué trop vite. Je n'avais pas mis le texte : Human Tissues and Cells ________________________________________ Why using human-based strategies in health research? In the context of health research, the systematic review of animal models that are used to study human diseases or assess toxicological risks are missing. In fact, animal model reviews do little to assess the value or clinical relevance of animal models but rather insist on what the model is used for and what has been done with the animals12. (<= Ici, je ne sais pas s'il s'agit d'une faute de frappe) Furthermore, meta-analyses (combining and pooling the results of many experiments) are even more difficult to find. This lack of careful evaluation of animal models used in research causes a waste of resources and misleads investigators. Keywords used in PUBMED Animal Model Animal Model Review Animal Model Systematic Review Animal Model Meta-analysis Numbers of articles found 11/02/2004 30,159 3,671 460 10 (Ne t'occupe pas trop de ce mélange ci-haut que j'ai mis en vert car c'est dans des tableaux et le forum ne les reproduit pas) Historically, animal models have been used to obtain information on health disorders and test the safety of other chemicals before putting them on the market for human use. Animal research represents the principal category of studies funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, since it takes up more than 60% of the grants and is 3 times the number of clinical studies. In practice, grants are directed to clinical research if there is prior animal data supporting further testing on human subjects. In addition, Health Canada requires evidence that drugs, for instance, are acceptably safe; a checklist of animal tests is reviewed before authorizing further testing on human subjects. All of this demonstrates how both health research and product safety rely heavily on animal-based research. # Project with Animal Subjects CIHR Approved Amount for Project with Animal Subjects # Project with Human Subjects CIHR Approved Amount for Project with Human Subjects 17479 (66%) 1,295,852,000(63%) 9065 756,037,000 Fiscal Years 1995-2005 The few reviews published stress how difficult it is to compare the results of animal experiments due to the number of experimental designs, the different animal models, the various methods employed, and the lack of precise description in scientific journals. There are inherent problems to using animals in research, such as the lack of rationale for the use of live animal species when other methods are available or could be investigated. Cross species differences make extrapolation very difficult due to the lack of analogy-isomorphism with the human species, especially at the cellular and molecular levels where diseases occur. Subtle differences between animal species are the result of millions of years of evolution. Molecular taxonomy has shown important genetic differences between chimpanzees and humans, although we have 98.7% of DNA sequence homology in common. In toxicology, primates are known to be poor predictors of the toxicological risks in the human species. In particular, the inability to translate the majority of findings gathered through animal research into some practical benefits for society is notoriously recognized in the animal research community. For some, the practical application of animal research to benefit human health is actually of little importance; new knowledge alone justifies animal experiments, even though this means harming sentient animals and no gains at the end. One area, which is an important concern for many people, is the discovery of cures and treatments for serious diseases and the safety of every day life products. The incidence of some diseases (neurological diseases, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, stroke, respiratory disorders) has been on the rise, as are injuries and mortality due to the side effects of drugs. There is now a palpable concern regarding the safety of drugs and all other chemicals, some of which injure or kill millions of consumers. In addition to the lack of monitoring and post-marketing surveillance, there is also a lack of appropriate testing at the very beginning. It is common knowledge that 80% of clinical studies are uninformative, and most, if not all, are derived from preclinical research on animals. As animal testing receives most of the available subsidies and grants, there is less funding available for clinical research. Ironically, the findings of animal experiments in fields such gene therapy, pancreatic islets transplantation and other techniques are not further investigated in human subjects because of a lack of resources. The approximate cost of the Canadian public health care system is over 100 billion dollars per year and there is no indication that this situation is going to improve. One of the best ways to deal with the problems associated to health care management is to emphasize on prevention, education, better health research and scientific testing, that will result in more effective and safer drugs. Unfortunately, educating the public has been many times ineffective (eg, failure of anti-smoking campaigns)and coercive laws/taxes may be deemed necessary. Animal-based research is endorsed and carried out by industry and the government, and seen as a legally acceptable practice. As a consequence, such methodology has been widely accepted by society, regardless of its productivity and cost, and regardless of the alternatives to it. Not surprisingly, unproductive research and non-scientific testing have become standard procedures. Research and testing can be made more efficient by using models that closely reproduce some aspects of human biology and this is precisely why human cells and tissues are becoming attractive alternatives to the use of animal tissues and cells. From an historical point of view, the use of human cadavers in autopsies and anatomic studies has been prohibited for a long time because of moral and religious sentiments, and this until Renaissance, which saw the rise of modern human anatomy. Now, some academic and industrial scientists have learned to recognize the increasing need for in vitro human tissue and cell systems. Besides, a significant number of researchers emphasize the need to test products and hypotheses in a whole animal before testing in human subjects. Without precise evaluation of animal models, this methodology remains empirical. The real question at issue is the scientific risk assessment of drugs and chemicals through the use of valid models. Compared to the pioneers of the 19th century, there are now numerous methods available for research and testing of drugs and other chemicals. However, new alternatives can be investigated if a political will emerges and if actual funds support that endeavor. In fact, using human cells and tissues to study human biology is a sound approach and the information we can get is of considerable value. Due to the amount of information we have and the technologies we know, in addition to the moral and scientific pressures to do better science, we are entering a new era; academy and industry scientists consider to replacing in vivo and in vitro tests using animals with in vitro tests on human cells or tissues because they recognize the ethical and scientific superiority of this methodology. Also, alternatives to the use of animals in research are necessary to help us protect the rights, safety and well being of individuals. How do collection, distribution and research on human tissues and cells work in Canada and some other countries? Canada's Criminal code, the Privacy Act and provincial laws and regulations control the use of human tissue and research on human subjects. The Research Ethics Board that has expertise in this type of research governs the procedures and applies ethical guidelines to protect test subjects, as established by the Tri-Council that is composed of members of the CIHR, NSERC and SSHRC. Those guidelines emphasize the respect of human dignity, informed consent, privacy and confidentiality, equity, and free donation. Regarding research on human embryos, as passed recently by the House of Commons on Oct. 28 of last year, C-13 actually bans human cloning, but allows the use of human embryos for research. Researchers may obtain human tissue that is left after surgery, biopsies, foetal abortion, and when brain death is ascertained by two doctors in a patient who has donated the tissue or whose next-of-kin agrees to the donation. Cadaveric tissue can also be collected. Researchers must first submit an application to the Research Ethics Boards (REB) that evaluates the ethical and scientific aspects of the experimental design. If the application is rejected, the researcher may appeal the decision to a special board. As well, donors must be given information regarding the purpose of the research, the type of tissue collected, the potential uses of the tissue, and whether the tissue is traceable to the donor. In cases where tissue is not available, it may be obtained from tissue banks located in the USA or elsewhere, and shipped to Canadian laboratories. There is no research tissue bank in Canada, and little public information/education campaigns to show the potential benefits of using human tissue and cells for research. In England, there are laws that exist to protect the donor's identity and rights to privacy, and rules of informed consent apply too. The 'Human Tissue Act' (1961) permits the use of human tissues for therapeutic and research purposes as long there is no opposition from the donor or the donor's next of kin. The 'Human Organ Transplant Act,' (1989) prohibits payment in connection with organ or tissue removal for transplantation in another individual. The Peterborough Hospital Human Tissue Bank (PHHTB) and the National Blood Service Tissue Services (NBSTS) operating within the UK National Health Service have a system in place to retrieve cadaveric tissues for the commercial sector research. There is also an online registry for people willing to donate their body for research. One company in particular, Pharmagene Laboratories in Royston, England, uses human tissues and sophisticated computer technologies to develop and test new drugs. In the USA, tissue banks have also been developed. In 1986, when the International Institute for the Advancement of Medicine was established, public awareness on the option of donating organs and tissues for research was virtually zero. The 'National Organ Transplant Act' prohibits buying and selling human organs and tissues. The American Association of Tissue Banks (AATB) has established and monitors compliance with standards of quality and safety among transplant tissue banks. About two years ago, the Food and Drug Administration published a final rule that requires human cells, tissue, and cellular and tissue-based product establishments to register with the agency and list their human cells, tissues, and cellular and tissue-based products (HCT/Ps) In Europe, the European Network of Research Tissue Banks was created as an organization with expertise in human tissue banking and as a centre for advice on this type of service to academia and industries of state members. What can be done to enhance the collection of human parts for research purposes? What sort of tissue can be collected and what can be done with it?

Ma belle Do, j'ai commencé la traduction du document pour David. Ce n'est pas facile: très, très technique mais je crois que je m'en sors pas mal Cependant il y a quelques endroits où je ne suis pas trop certaine des termes (j'ai mis des " ? " ou des (...). Je n'ai pas encore complètement terminé mais comem je ne veux pas te garrocher le tout d'une traite, je te transcris ce que j'ai fait à date, alors si tu peux y jeter un petit coup d'oeil quand tu auras du temps, et surtout il n'y a pas à te presser car j'en ai encore pour une couple de jours avant d'avoir terminé le reste, donc rien ne presse.

Il n'y a rien à faire avec ce genre de "boucher" !!! Encore une fois, ta réponse est numéro UN, ma belle Do ! Quelle patiente, tu as !

Je ne sais pas Do mais en principes, les assureurs n'aiment pas perdre d'argent et ils en perdent énormément avec les fermes incendiées.

Alors, ça pourrait bien être lui !

C'est tout à fait épouvantable. Je ne comprend pas qu'avec le grand nombre d'incendies de ferme, les assurances soient encore abordables !

C'est un jeune boqué ! Il me fait penser à "piège à Dents" même si le piège à dents était plus vieux.

Je sais qu'ils ont eu un petit incendie l'été dernier en août mais apparemment ce n'était rien de trop grave, sauf qu'ils ont dû fermer un moment. Je n'y suis encore jamais allée mais j'aimerais bien l'essayer. mais si quelqu'un y va avant moi, j'aimerais bien avoir ses commentaires.

On va lui envoyer des photos d'agneau égorgé !!!!!!!!!!

Magnifique ma belle Do ! J'espère que ça lui fermera enfin le clapet !!!

Ok ! Do, parce que vraiment, lire, et essayer de comprendre, tout ce message en anglais, me demanderait bien du temps.

Je présume que oui, Do, mais je n'en ai pas entendu parler aux nouvelles.

Revoici le message au sujet des chevaux, Do.

Pitoyable comme analyse ! C'est ce qu'on appelle ne pas voir plus loin que le bout de son nez ! Bien dans ce cas, n'est-ce pas de la faute de ceux qu'il appelle lui-même "les cons". !

Bonjour Jaggy et bienvenue Je pense comme Ariix et Animal sur ce sujet et j'ajouterais à leurs commentaires que l'important est notre intention de ne plus nuire aux animaux. En portant ces bottes, as-tu vraiment le sentiment de nuire aux animaux ? Il se trouvera toujours des gens pour dire : "Ah! Tu portes du cuir, donc tu n'es pas parfaite et tu es mal placée pour me faire la leçon" mais ces personnes cherchent avant tout à détourner le problème de leurs propres irresponsabilités sur nous au lieu de chercher à se prendre en main et à comprendre que si l'on porte encore nos vieilles bottes de cuir c'est que nous ne voulons pas gaspiller en jetant ce qui est encore en bon état et qui polluerait et qui serait aussi une sorte de non-respect pour la pauvre bête à qui on a pris la peau pour ces bottes. En ce sens, je trouve que la solution d'Ariix est une bonne idée, si on a les moyens de se procurer une nouvelle paire. Tout comme Animal, il me reste aussi du cuir à la maison. Des fauteuils. Nous n'allons certainement pas les jeter et je peux très bien expliquer aux gens qui viendraient chez-moi et qui trouveraient à redire. A la dernière manif où je suis allée il y a justement quelqu'un qui a dit à un manifestant : T'as des bottes en cuir" et le type qui a dit ça s'est poussé à toute vitesse sans attendre de réponse. Le manifestant n'avait pas de bottes en cuir. Mais ceci démontre bien que ces personnes ne cherchent ainsi qu'à se déculpabiliser en nous accusant. C'est un peu comme "Et les carottes, c'est de la vie..."

For further assistance, please send mail to <postmaster> If you do so, please include this problem report. J'ai posté l'avis reçu au mailer-demon qui m'avait envoyé le message mais je ne sais pas si ce sont eux les "postmaster" à qui ils disent de faire part du problème. On verra. Je vais réessayer lundi dans la journée, histoire de voir s'ils nous font parvenir un accusé de réception car voyant que ça ne fonctionnait pas, j'ai quand même envoyé la lettre hier soir. Je ne voulais pas prendre de risques.

C'est parce que c'est tout en anglais et je ne savais vraiment pas quoi écrire, surtout que j'étais pas mal magannée. Je vais le retracer et le remonter, Do.

OH OH ! Problème; je viens d'avoir un retour. Peut-être que j'essaie avec notre autre adresse (presidente ????) __________________________________________________________ This is the Postfix program at host webmail-outgoing.us4.outblaze.com. I'm sorry to have to inform you that your message could not be be delivered to one or more recipients. It's attached below. For further assistance, please send mail to <postmaster> If you do so, please include this problem report. You can delete your own text from the attached returned message. The Postfix program <animaltransportanimaux@inspection.gc.ca>: host agrpazsmtp2.agr.gc.ca[192.197.71.137] said: 550 5.7.1 <aequoanimo@mail.com>... Access denied (in reply to MAIL FROM command) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Parti !

OK c'est fait. Dans le "subject" du courriel, j'écris : Modification à la réglementation/to the regulations

Parfait, Merci, Do.

Encore une chose, que préfères-tu : In Canada, each year, .... OU Each year, in Canada ... Au Canada, chaque année .... OU Chaque année, au Canada ....

Ah parfait, mais je vais aussi écrire "each year".

Ok Do, je fais ces corrections. Est-ce que je mets le texte en français en premier et que j'écris en haut : English translation below (?) ou si tu penses que j'y vais avec l'anglais en premier ?