What if two of the most important medicines in modern history had never reached patients?
According to Meredith Blanchard, Director of Advocacy and Policy at the National Anti-Vivisection Society (NAVS), it’s a question worth asking.
In a recent episode of the Better Life for Animals Podcast, Meredith joined host Chris DeRose to discuss why the future of biomedical research depends on moving beyond outdated animal testing models and embracing modern, human-relevant approaches.
One example from the conversation is particularly striking.
“If these two drugs had been developed and approved during the time when animal testing was mandated for drugs,” Meredith explained, “those drugs would not exist today.”
The Case of Penicillin and Aspirin
Today, penicillin and aspirin are among the most widely used medicines in the world.
Yet both illustrate an important limitation of relying on animal models to predict human outcomes.
Penicillin is toxic to certain animal species, including guinea pigs, one of the animals most commonly used in laboratory research. Aspirin has been shown to cause birth defects and other toxicities in several animal species despite its long history of safe and effective use in humans when used appropriately.
These examples demonstrate a fundamental challenge in biomedical research: animals do not always respond to drugs the same way humans do.
While animal studies have historically been used to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of new therapies, biological differences between species can produce results that fail to predict how treatments will perform in people.
What Have We Missed?
For Meredith, the larger question is impossible to ignore.
“There’s no telling what compounds, what therapies we have missed out on because they proved harmful in animal models and never moved forward, which is just something that blows me away.”
It’s a reminder that the limitations of animal models don’t only create the risk of ineffective drugs reaching clinical trials. They may also prevent promising therapies from ever reaching patients in the first place.
As human-relevant technologies continue to advance, researchers now have access to tools that were unimaginable just a few decades ago. Organoids, organs-on-chips, advanced computational modeling, artificial intelligence, and other New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) offer opportunities to study human biology directly, often producing data that is more relevant to human health than traditional animal models.
Building a Better Future for Biomedical Research
At NAVS, we believe scientific progress and ethical responsibility go hand in hand.
Our work focuses on accelerating the transition toward research methods that are more predictive of human biology while reducing reliance on animals. Through policy advocacy, public education, scientific partnerships, and support for emerging researchers, NAVS is helping build a future where innovation drives better outcomes for both people and animals.
Conversations like this one are an important part of that effort.
By challenging long-held assumptions about animal testing and highlighting the promise of human-relevant science, we can help foster a research enterprise that is more effective, more ethical, and better equipped to improve human health.
Listen to the Full Conversation
Watch Meredith Blanchard’s interview with the Better Life for Animals Podcast to learn more about the future of human-relevant science, the limitations of animal testing, and why modern research methods are transforming biomedical discovery.
Listen to the full episode here: https://betterlifeforanimals.com/podcast/073-meredith-blanchard/
