Monkey Business

February 8, 2021 4:47 AM

China’s plan for medical domination
posted by Gyan (14 comments total)

We have invasive vervet monkeys on St. Martin, St. Kitts, Nevis and Barbados. Free if you come pick them up.
posted by snofoam at 5:37 AM on February 8, 2021 [4 favorites]

One of the biosecurity issues we face in Australia is a prohibition on the importation of hamsters. If the rodents ever got loose they'd wreck the place and we've been through this before. This posed a problem for testing our own homegrown covid vaccine. The decision was made to perform the tests in the Netherlands. I would like to have been in the room where the question was debated, where shall we find enough hamsters? When some undergrad nervously raised a hand and suggested 'Hamsterdam?'
posted by adept256 at 7:57 AM on February 8, 2021 [24 favorites]

Maybe it's time to find an alternative to prioritizing the needs of humanity over the needs of non-human primates.
posted by aniola at 9:25 AM on February 8, 2021 [5 favorites]

But for at least half a decade, numbers will remain finite

I know this is very serious business, but I enjoyed this sly allusion to an infinite number of monkeys.
posted by Jon Mitchell at 9:59 AM on February 8, 2021 [3 favorites]

The priorities of humans are in direct conflict to that of other primates when it comes to medical testing. And in that case I'm all for Team Human. Monkeys should be treated humanely and not harmed unnecessarily. But harming a few monkeys to test a medicine for, say, a deadly contagious respiratory disease, a medicine that saves the lives of many humans... Well, sorry monkeys.

I hate how this article is literally titled "China's plan for medical domination". Why not "China's plan for increasing medical experimentation?" Perhaps they need the monkeys enough they have no desire to export them any more.
posted by Nelson at 10:15 AM on February 8, 2021 [7 favorites]

Surplus of Monkeys is my band's name.
posted by parmanparman at 10:33 AM on February 8, 2021

“I think this all presents serious issues when you look at China’s attitudes to intellectual property (IP), in that it has a very poor record on respecting IP rights,” says Green. “There is a great risk in taking the products that we develop and sending them over there for testing”

Burying the lede. This is a problem only because Western countries want to develop drugs to make money, not help people.

Fund medical research with tax dollars, make the drugs patent-free, and coordinate testing and trials with China. Not a problem.
posted by explosion at 11:25 AM on February 8, 2021 [1 favorite]

I believe the offloading to China of nonhuman primate biomedical research is a problem for animal welfare. All animal research in Europe and North America is under strong, and expensive, regulatory oversight, and research in nonhuman primates is always under especially intense scrutiny. And rightly so; biomedical research in animals is absolutely essential for the public's interest in advancing human health and protecting ourselves from diseases like covid, but the public also has a justified interest in ensuring that animal research is conducted humanely, without unnecessary suffering and with concern for the species-specific needs of the animals being studied. The systems of regulation that are in place in North America and Europe were created by robust public discussion resulting from some high-profile cases that made it clear that, as a whole, drug companies and individual scientists were unable or unwilling to adequately balance the public's interest in animal welfare against their own financial and reputation stake in producing scientific findings. Researchers may sometimes find these regulations burdensome, but on the whole our research is better for it, and when the public does understand the systems that are in place to protect animal welfare, science benefits from increased public trust.

As far as I understand it, China on the whole has not had this type of public discussion around animal research ethics. While Chinese research institutions do have regulations governing animal welfare in place, my understanding is that these exist primarily to satisfy the publication requirements in top-tier scientific journals published in the West, which will not publish animal research without proper ethics oversight, rather than as a response to local regulatory requirements. Some Chinese researchers I've worked with are shocked when they first encounter the level of regulations governing scientific research (both in animals and in humans) in the U.S., and openly discuss returning to China to skirt the regulatory burden of working in the U.S. While I believe that plenty of good and ethical science is being done in China, a lack of oversight always allows the less ethical to profit by disregarding things like animal welfare when carrying out their work, and puts even otherwise-ethical researchers in the difficult position of having to choose between spending extra resources on animal welfare and potentially being outcompeted by those who don't, or ignoring the issue to remain competitive.

I think countries with strong regulatory systems governing biomedical research, and in particular governing research in nonhuman primates, have a moral obligation to ensure that the resources necessary to conduct that research are available locally, rather than off-shoring that work to places like China with weaker oversight of animal welfare in scientific research. Biomedical research in animals is always under political attack in the West, and research with nonhuman primates especially threatened. The incredible pace of vaccine development over the last year is built on this foundation of biomedical research and would not have been possible without it; like it or not, we need these animals for now. I'd encourage people to think about contacting their elected representatives to express support for well-funded, well-regulated, humanely conducted biomedical research.
posted by biogeo at 11:33 AM on February 8, 2021 [6 favorites]

But for at least half a decade, numbers will remain finite

I know this is very serious business, but I enjoyed this sly allusion to an infinite number of monkeys.

Also, while I may advocate for the availability of more research monkeys, god help us if we ever end up with a transfinite number of them.
posted by biogeo at 11:36 AM on February 8, 2021

biogeo, your comment spends a lot of time hinting that Chinese scientists abuse research animals without citing any evidence they actually do. I don't buy into the idea that more regulation definitely means more safety for animals. But I'm way outside my expertise here. A cursory look on Google has a couple of suggestive further readings:

Ethical Questions for Research Ethics: Animal Research in China

This article raises a legitimate concern for animals used in research in China. China does not have any anticruelty laws, but there are various regulations concerning the use of animals in research. More scientific experiments using animals are shifting from the West to China, where ethical rules and animal welfare laws are not as stringent as those in Western countries. The article focuses on animals in research in China by outlining the regulatory framework governing such animal use. It also raises ethical issues for Western scientists doing animal research in China.

China outcry over laboratory dogs shows changing attitudes to animals

Public outrage in China over photographs of laboratory dogs lying muzzled and abandoned on the roof of a medical school building spotlights changing attitudes to animal rights, animal welfare groups say.

posted by Nelson at 2:26 PM on February 8, 2021 [1 favorite]

I am not trying to hint that Chinese scientists abuse research animals. I am saying that a weak regulatory environment, wherever it occurs, will create situations where abuses, either due to unethical experimental design or just to lapses in care, are much, much more frequent. Weak regulations leave decisions around animal welfare entirely in the hands of individual researchers who may be under pressure to cut corners to meet goals, or who may make well-intentioned but incorrect decisions about animal welfare due to a lack of expertise. Good regulations create a system for supporting ethical animal research that makes welfare decisions accountable to and informed by both experts and the public. Ensuring animal welfare in a research environment isn't only about what you don't do, it takes positive action and a significant allocation of resources.
posted by biogeo at 4:33 PM on February 8, 2021

I don’t know how you could take (a) the abuse that humans inflict on animals pretty much anytime they can do so without consequences, and (b) the level of abuse that the Chinese economic system permits toward basically *everyone* under its dominion, and conclude that the treatment of these animals is anything but horrific.
posted by bjrubble at 6:15 PM on February 8, 2021

As far as I understand it, China on the whole has not had this type of public discussion around animal research ethics.

You are correct (Disclaimer: I live in China). We are just at the point in time where recycling, pollution and healthy living have become important topics in Tier 1 and Tier 2 cities. Animal research ethics is far beyond this and would, among the people I know, not spark action beyond posting a comment on the internet.

In other news: it's unbelievable just how much investment money is available to medical industry startups as well as those in the aviation sector. I am pretty much every week being asked to find promising, special Western companies, meaning those with patents or strong moats, that Chinese individuals could either invest in or take over and expand through new business coming from China or flat-out relocation to China. Getting 10-100 million dollars here is about as difficult for the right company as choosing socks is for me in the morning.

This is, of course, the exact same playbook that was used to grow local smartphone/touchscreen/iot/high-speed rail industries. I fully expect Chinese companies to run circles around our counterparts within ten to fifteen years.
posted by krautland at 8:44 AM on February 9, 2021

Related to Krautland's comment: Overview of Chinese Investments in the Western Aviation Industry. Chinese companies and government investments basically bought all of America and Europe's general aviation companies in the last 10 years. Cirrus, Mooney, Continental Motors, Diamond.. these were all marginal businesses in the US for the last 20+ years and someone found the value in them. It's not Boeing or Airbus, but it's the expertise you need to build the next Boeing or Airbus.

The medical work seems a little different though, more homegrown. Given how the Covid situation has played out I wouldn't be surprised to learn there's a Chinese company making mRNA vaccines within a couple of years. They already rapidly developed an effective Covid-19 vaccine, just with more traditional technologies.
posted by Nelson at 9:15 AM on February 9, 2021