5 ms·

Serious question: is there any reason to think that mice would be a good proxy for human health results re: meat consumption?

• ddoolin 12y ago
  Can't claim to know personally but a quick search turns up numerous results claiming that mice and rats are similar to humans in anatomy, genetics, internal processes, etc. I think they become even better candidates when you compare them to other possible test subjects, especially factoring in the cost/value. They are relatively cheap and easy to breed with almost no genetic variation (good for testing), accelerated lifespans, small, etc.
  • JonathonW 12y ago
    You do have to keep in mind that they're not a perfect model, though. For example, the "has been known to cause cancer in laboratory animals" label that used to be required on saccharin-containing products was removed after it turned out to be related to some unique characteristics of rodents' urinary tracts
    • CamperBob2 12y ago
      That, and they were feeding the rats ridiculous quantities of saccharin, as I recall.
• jmhain 12y ago
  Did you even read the article? > the scientists found that feeding Neu5Gc to mice engineered to be deficient in the sugar (like humans) significantly promoted spontaneous cancers
  • newaccountfool 12y ago
    I don't think they're just refering to this specific study though, they're asking it in a more general term.
• jonnathanson 12y ago
  Mice are far from perfect proxies for humans, but when it comes to dietary and nutrition studies, they are surprisingly good matches. Others have pointed out the cost/quantity/ease advantages of working with mice. Another big advantage is that some mice (and many rats) are opportunistic omnivores, like humans. As such, their digestive systems have evolved to be reasonably similar to ours. (Key word here being "reasonably").
  • csdrane 12y ago
    That makes sense. Thanks.