Gerbils in Space, and Other Signs of the Apocalypse

During my weekend ritual of reading the BBC and other news online, I read the Russia has sent ten gerbils to Mars. Equipped with plenty of food and a special machine for cleaning up gerbil poo, the rodents are due to spend twelve days in space to observe the potential effect of travel to Mars on humans. Even more bizarre is that the entire space flight will be captured on film. What I wouldn’t give to catch a glimpse of this adorable trip.

While the idea of ten cute furry rodents puffing around at zero gravity sounds precious, their intended welcome home isn’t nearly as appealing: “The gerbils may find space preferable to returning to Earth - several are to be dissected upon their return.” Sucks to be a gerbil.

Those poor bastards! To go where no gerbil has gone before, only to be robbed of this distinguished stature by death and subsequent dissection. While this is hardly the first time people have sent animals to space in their stead, it still brings to mind the animal testing morality question. I won’t go into details of the argument, since Ted did such a thorough and well-written job of it already.

What I’m wondering is why animal testing is necessary in the first place, especially in this instance. The purpose for dissecting the gerbils, as stated by a Russian scientist, is this: “will enable scientists to determine salt exchange mechanisms in zero gravity conditions.” The article also points out that the Russians have devised special technology for cleaning up zero-gravity rodent poop, never mind the advanced technology involved in the actual spaceship. Why is it that, for all this technology, they can’t devise a way to electronically determine salt exchange? I guess no one was willing to put up the funding for it, and gerbils are cheap.

In the future, perhaps more scientists, Russian or otherwise, should work with groups such as the John Hopkins Center for Alternatives to Animal Testing. As the Center states,

We are not an activist group; rather, we seek to effect change by working with scientists in industry, government, and academia to find new ways to replace animals with non-animal methods, reduce the numbers of animals necessary, or refine methods to make them less painful or stressful to the animals involved.

It’s good to know that there are science-based groups working to change the scientific community’s dependence on animal testing. Lord knows there are already many groups, such as PETA and The Humane Society, who have the activist part covered. While I don’t disagree with these efforts, I’m of the opinion that the more preachy an organization is, the less it will be listened to. I love The Humane Society, and I don’t think the group is all that preachy. But PETA, on the other hand, has enough collective anger to put off even the friendliest sympathizers. And never mind the Animal Liberation Front, whose acts of thievery and destruction ultimately make minimal change, if any at all. Sure, it’d be great if stealing every last beagle and chimp from all the world’s testing facilities made a difference, but sadly, animals are highly replaceable. Reproduction allows for an endless supply of test subjects, and, thanks to insurance, buildings can always be rebuilt. While destruction is an obvious nuisance to those whom it affects, it’s by no means a solution.

If the scientific community values human life over animal life, no amount of preaching or destruction will change their minds. I believe that the only way to enact real change in the world of scientific testing is to work with scientists, rather than against them. So, to all you scientists out there, listen up: use those fantastic brains of yours to come up with animal testing alternatives, and then science won’t seem so evil to the rest of us. And for crap’s sake, leave the gerbils on the ground.