Journalists:

For press enquiries,

call 07739531256.

Between 16th November and 8th December, Dods Polling interviewed 95 Members of Parliament online on their attitudes towards human based research.

The numbers below reflect total interviews conducted with MPs.

Total 95

Party (totals)

Conservative 37

Labour 35

Scottish National Party 13

Other 10

Region (totals)

East Midlands 7

Eastern 4

London 9

North East 3

North West 16

Northern Ireland 8

Scotland 14

South East 7

South West 8

Wales 8

West Midlands 5

Yorkshire & Humberside 6

There is a current assumption that animals as 'predictive models' in medical research is an effective way to predict the human response to drugs. However, there is scientific evidence to show that "research conducted on animals continues to be unable to reasonably predict what can be expected in humans" (Fiona Godlee, Editor of the British Medical Journal).

If it could be proved to you that human-based research is more effective in discovering cures for chronic diseases, and a better return on tax-payer investment, would you support a debate between leading medical science experts on the issue? Please select the most relevant answer:

If there is evidence to support this, then I would support a debate

I would support a debate on this topic regardless

I'm content that animals as predictive models for humans in research is effective, and happy to ignore scientific evidence to the contrary

I would like to find out more about the issue so would encourage a debate

If the conditions set out in the question were met, 90 of the 95 MPs would support a debate on human-based research. Fourteen of the 95 MPs would support a debate regardless of the conditions being met.

Five MPs are not open to debating human-based research and described themselves as happy to ignore scientific evidence. Two are Conservative party members and two are from Northern Ireland.

Parliamentary perceptions of human based research - all MPs

If it could be proved to you that human-based research is more effective in discovering cures for chronic diseases, and a better return on tax-payer investment, would you support a debate between leading medical science experts on the issue? Please select the most relevant answer:

I would like to find out more about the issue so would encourage a debate 27

I'm content that animals as predictive models for humans in research is effective, and happy to ignore scientific evidence to the contrary 5

I would support a debate on this topic regardless 14

If there is evidence to support this, then I would support a debate 45

Parliamentary perceptions of human based research - Labour and Conservative MPs

If it could be proved to you that human-based research is more effective in discovering cures for chronic diseases, and a better return on tax-payer investment, would you support a debate between leading medical science experts on the issue? Please select the most relevant answer:

I would like to find out more about the issue so would encourage a debate

Labour 33% Conservative 31%

I'm content that animals as predictive models for humans in research is effective, and happy to ignore scientific evidence

Labour 0% Conservative 8%

I would support a debate on this topic regardless

Labour 14% Conservative 21%

If there is evidence to support this, then I would support a debate

Labour 47% Conservative 45%

Conclusions

There is some small resistance to human-based research, evidenced by the five per cent of MPs who took the strong oppositional position that they are 'content that animals as predictive models for humans in research is effective, and happy to ignore scientific evidence to the contrary'.

Otherwise, MPs have said that they will support a debate between leading medical experts if it can be proved to MPs that human-based research is more effective in discovering cures for chronic diseases, and a better return on tax-payer investment.

www.dodsinformation.com