Human Stakeholders and the Use of Animals in Drug Development

an article by Lisa A. Kramer (University of Toronto, Canada) and Ray Greek (Americans for MedicalAdvancement, Goleta, CA) published in Business and Society Review Volume 123 Issue 1 (Spring 2018)

Abstract

Pharmaceutical firms seek to fulfill their responsibilities to stakeholders by developing drugs that treat diseases.

We evaluate the social and financial costs of developing new drugs relative to the realized benefits and find the industry falls short of its potential. This is primarily due to legislation‐mandated reliance on animal test results in early stages of the drug development process, leading to a mere 10 percent success rate for new drugs entering human clinical trials.

We cite hundreds of biomedical studies from journals including Nature, Science, and the Journal of the American Medical Association to show animal modeling is ineffective, misleading to scientists, unable to prevent the development of dangerous drugs, and prone to prevent the development of useful drugs.

Legislation still requires animal testing prior to human testing even though the pharmaceutical sector has better options that were unavailable when animal modeling was first mandated.

We propose that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Congress should work together to abolish regulations and policies that require animal use. Doing so will benefit pharmaceutical industry stakeholders, including patients whose health depends on drugs and the many people who rely on the financial well‐being of pharmaceutical firms.

Full text (PDF 56pp) Note: The PDF uses a large font!

---

Knowledge work: gender-blind or gender-biased?

an article by Catherine Truss (University of Kent, UK), Edel Conway, Gráinne Kelly, Kathy Monks and Patrick C Flood (Dublin City University, Ireland), Alessia d’Amato (London School of Economics, UK) and Enda Hannon (Kingston University, UK) published in Work Employment & Society Volume 26 Number 5 (October 2012)

Abstract

Knowledge-intensive firms (KIFs) have been the subject of growing interest from researchers. However, investigations into the comparative experiences of men and women in KIFs remain sparse, and little is known about women’s participation in the processes of innovation and knowledge exchange and combination that are core features of KIFs.

The article reports on the findings of a study in the UK and Ireland involving 498 male and female knowledge workers in KIFs.

Despite equal levels of qualification and experience, women are more likely to be in lower status and less secure jobs. They also predominantly occupy roles featuring less variety and autonomy than men and, despite comparable levels of knowledge exchange and combination, are less likely to be in a position to translate this into the innovative work behaviours necessary for career advancement.

The findings suggest that women’s experiences of and participation in knowledge processes within KIFs differ fundamentally from men’s.

---