No. To be reliable, data from animal testing must be consistent. It's not. For example, toxicity testing in other species is about as likely as a coin toss in predicting the effect in humans.
Here are a few more examples:
- A 2008 study in the journal Alternatives to Laboratory Animals showed that more than 80 HIV/AIDS vaccines successful in nonhuman primates failed in human trials.
- According to a 2004 study in the journal Stroke, more than 4,000 studies report the success of more than 700 treatments of stroke in animals. Yet a 2005 paper in the International Journal of Neuroprotection and Neuroregeneration reported that none of the approximately 150 of these treatments tested in humans showed clinical benefit.
- Drugs intended to reduce inflammation were successfully tested in mice, but failed in nearly 150 human critical trials according to a 2013 study in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
