Translate For Animals

This is a question from my girlfriend, that I honestly wasn't entirely sure of. I didn't think they could because as far as I know they've never been shown to have this ability. However, she stated that "well if they have a universal translator and animals are in the universe, they can be translated." Hence, why I'm posting, because she has a good point.

A second explanation is that animal models may not adequately mimic human pathophysiology. Test animals are often young, rarely have comorbidities, and are not exposed to the range of competing (and interacting) interventions that humans often receive. The timing, route, and formulation of the intervention may also introduce problems. Most animal experiments have a limited sample size. Animal studies with small sample sizes are more likely to report higher estimates of effect than studies with larger numbers; this distortion usually regresses when all available studies are analysed in aggregate.10 11 To compound the problem, investigators may select positive animal data but ignore equally valid but negative work when planning clinical trials, a phenomenon known as optimism bias.12

DOWNLOAD 🔥 https://urlin.us/2y67ht 🔥

In a recent report, a Phase II randomized clinical trial of the Hedgehog pathway antagonist IPI-926 (saridegib) in patients with advanced chondrosarcoma was stopped early for futility [19]. The Hedgehog pathway is dysregulated in a variety of solid tumors and provides key growth and survival signals to tumor cells. Mutations resulting in constitutive Hedgehog signaling are causal in cartilage tumors such as chondrosarcoma [20]. The Phase II clinical trial for IPI-926 translated from a successful animal model of IPI-926 on a malignant solid brain tumor [21]. IPI-926 treated mice with the advanced brain tumors gained a fivefold increase in survival [21]. However, IPI-926 showed no effect compared to placebo in the human trial [19]. Therefore even a targeted molecular approach did not result in clinical efficacy despite remarkable success in mice.

This app eliminates the language and communication barrier between animals and humans. Our design process was to create something similar to Google translate so it can be easy for users to get around.

Our projects works by using the sound waves and tone to determine stress or angst and other emotions in our selected animals voice. Our program uses this to determine what physical words the animal is trying to say by translating it through to the selected language.

The vast majority of drugs entering human trials fail. This problem (called "attrition") is widely recognized as a public health crisis, and has been discussed openly for the last two decades. Multiple recent reviews argue that animals may be just too different physiologically, anatomically, and psychologically from humans to be able to predict human outcomes, essentially questioning the justification of basic biomedical research in animals. This review argues instead that the philosophy and practice of experimental design and analysis is so different in basic animal work and human clinical trials that an animal experiment (as currently conducted) cannot reasonably predict the outcome of a human trial. Thus, attrition does reflect a lack of predictive validity of animal experiments, but it would be a tragic mistake to conclude that animal models cannot show predictive validity. A variety of contributing factors to poor validity are reviewed. The need to adopt methods and models that are highly specific (i.e., which can identify true negative results) in order to complement the current preponderance of highly sensitive methods (which are prone to false positive results) is emphasized. Concepts in biomarker-based medicine are offered as a potential solution, and changes in the use of animal models required to embrace a translational biomarker-based approach are outlined. In essence, this review advocates a fundamental shift, where we treat every aspect of an animal experiment that we can as if it was a clinical trial in a human population. However, it is unrealistic to expect researchers to adopt a new methodology that cannot be empirically justified until a successful human trial. "Validation with known failures" is proposed as a solution. Thus new methods or models can be compared against existing ones using a drug that has translated (a known positive) and one that has failed (a known negative). Current methods should incorrectly identify both as effective, but a more specific method should identify the negative compound correctly. By using a library of known failures we can thereby empirically test the impact of suggested solutions such as enrichment, controlled heterogenization, biomarker-based models, or reverse-translated measures.

The repeated failure of animal models to yield findings that translate into humans is a serious threat to the credibility of preclinical biomedical research. The use of animals in research that lacks translational validity is unacceptable in any ethical environment, and so this problem needs urgent attention. To reproduce any human illness in animals is a serious challenge, but this is especially the case for psychiatric disorders. Yet, many authors do not hesitate to describe their findings as a 'model' of such a disorder. More cautious scientists describe the behavioural phenotype as 'disorder-like', without specifying the way(s) in which the abnormal behaviour could be regarded as being analogous to any of the diagnostic features of the disorder in question. By way of discussing these problems, this article focuses on common, but flawed, assumptions that pervade preclinical research of depression and antidepressants. Particular attention is given to the difference between putative 'models' of this illness and predictive screens for candidate drug treatments, which is evidently widely misunderstood. However, the problems highlighted in this article are generic and afflict research of all psychiatric disorders. This dire situation will be resolved only when funders and journal editors take action to ensure that researchers interpret their findings in a less ambitious, but more realistic, evidence-based way that would parallel changes in research of the cause(s), diagnosis and treatment of psychiatric problems in humans.

II. All agriculture (consolidated) markets, supermarkets, food and beverage units, e-commerce platforms, and other such business places are to strictly prohibit the trading in wild animals in any form.

Animals have played a pivotal role in countless life-saving discoveries in the modern era. For example, in crude experiments in the 1800s, dogs were injected with extracts made from the pancreases of other animals, which led to insulin therapy for human diabetes. Much more recently, genetically modified mice were used to develop revolutionary cancer immunotherapy drugs, such as that credited with curing advanced melanoma in AFL footballer Jarryd Roughead.

Another review found the treatment effect (benefit or harm) from six medical interventions carried out in humans and animals was similar for only half the interventions. That is, the results of animal and human trials disagreed half the time.

There are two fundamental perspectives potentially explaining translational failures. The first main perspective is that the concept of animal-to-human predictability is fundamentally mistaken [4]. This perspective is based on the observation that the hypothesis that animals are predictable for humans has never been scientifically tested [5, 6], and that there are important differences between species in e.g. physiology, genetics, epigenetics and molecular biology [4, 7]. Animal studies have historically been implemented in drug approval procedures, which may have been based on scientifically outdated principles [8]. Besides, animals and humans are complex systems, that are more than the sum of their parts, and therefore always unpredictable [9, 10]. From this perspective, animal experiments that are performed to inform human health are not ethically acceptable.

Of the 121 included references, 119 were in English, one was in German, and one was in French. The unit of measurement was compound or other type of intervention for 104 references, study/experiment for 10, and symptom or event for 7. The number of included interventions, studies or symptoms per reference ranged from 5 to 1256 (also see Fig. 8). Specific animal models were described in 35 references, and comprised e.g. xenografts, bile duct cannulated animals, chimeric mice, or a combination of various models.

Reporting information was limited; less than 15 references reported sex, age or disease status of the animals or humans included in the analyses and the type of studies or trials. Information on dose was reported in 24 references, information on route of administration in 40 (mainly multiple and intravenous, also oral, intraperitoneal and topical). These data were not further analysed.

Of the 121 included references, 16 addressed efficacy or translation in general. The results from these references are summarised in Table 3. Several of these references were familiar to the authors before starting this work and provided the background for our protocol [57,58,59]. Lindl et al. followed the results from 51 animal ethics requests, and found very little translation to the clinical situation [58], with their analysis restricted to a 10-year time window. This may be rather short for analysing translational success, as the development of new treatments is a lengthy process, (see e.g. [39]) and development times seem to increase over time [2]. Hackam et al. followed highly cited animal studies, and found that about one-third translated to randomised clinical trials [57]. Perel et al. compared the effects of 6 interventions between animals and humans with systematic literature reviews, with half of them concordant [59]. We hoped to retrieve a number of comparable references, but only found one; Contopoulos-Ioannidis et al. analysed 101 articles that described novel therapeutic or preventive promises based on animal data [60]. 16 of these novel interventions were tested in clinical trials, of which 12 had a positive result in the trial. 17dc91bb1f