Smoking Experiments on

Animals
Health officials have known for decades that smoking
cigarettes causes disease in nearly every organ of the
human body and that animal tests are poor predictors of
these effects. Yet cruel, irrelevant animal tests are still
being conducted. In these tests, rats sealed in small
canisters are forced to breathe cigarette smoke or vapors
from electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) for up to six
hours straight, every day, for as long as two years.

In the past, experimenters attached tubes to holes in

dogs’ and monkeys’ necks or strapped masks to their
faces to force smoke into their lungs. In other
experiments, experimenters applied cigarette tar directly
to mice and rats’ bare skin to induce the growth of skin
tumors.
The Guardian

In this photo from the 1970s, dogs in a testing laboratory were forced to inhale
cigarette smoke. Today, dogs are no longer routinely used, but testing of cigarettes
continues with other animals.

Crucial Differences

Different animals have different reactions to toxins, and

animals in laboratories aren’t exposed to cigarette smoke
or e-vapors in the same manner or time frame as human
smokers are—making animal tests poor predictors of the
results in humans.

The link between tobacco and lung cancer in humans was

obscured for years because data collected from
experiments on animals did not show this relationship.
This isn’t surprising when you consider the biological
differences between humans and other animals, such as
the following:

Rats breathe faster than humans and only through

 their noses, whereas humans can breathe through
their nose or mouth.
Rats live close to the ground, and their noses do a
better job of filtering the air they inhale.
A rat’s nose is smaller than a human’s nose, and
therefore, a rat cannot inhale larger particles that can
enter human lungs.
The cells found in rat and human lungs differ, which
affects their ability to cope with toxins.

Simply put—rats or other animals shouldn’t be used to

predict what might happen in humans.

Are Smoking Experiments on Animals Required?

Belgium, Estonia, Germany, Slovakia, and the U.K. have

banned tobacco product development and testing using
animals.1-5

U.S. law does not have outright requirements for toxicity

testing of tobacco products (including e-cigarettes) or
their ingredients on animals. Manufacturers of these
products must show the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration’s (FDA) Center for Tobacco Products (CTP)
that any new products are equally or less toxic than
conventional cigarettes, and they can choose what test
methods to use to do so. However, the CTP may reject a
company’s application that doesn’t include animal tests
and suggest testing on animals in order to get a product
on the market.
In addition, animal experiments to study the diseases
caused by cigarette smoking is commonplace, especially
at universities. For example, in 2015, a useless study
conducted at three U.S. universities forced monkeys to
inhale cigarette smoke for six hours every day for one year
before they were killed, only to confirm that a biomarker of
chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) was
reduced—something that had been known from human
COPD patients since at least 1992.6,7

The Way Forward

Instead of conducting animal tests, companies can use

non-animal (computer- and human cell–based) tests and
the existing body of knowledge from human
epidemiological and clinical studies about the health
concerns associated with smoking.

Non-animal methods overcome the species-specific

differences between humans and rodents and can deliver
human-relevant data. For example, three-dimensional
tissue models of the human respiratory tract can be used.
These tissues can be formed from cells of donors of
different ages, sexes, and races as well as former or
current smokers or patients with smoking-related
diseases such as COPD.

To end experiments on animals, PETA funds the

development of non-animal tests and PETA scientists
attend and host meetings and workshops to persuade
researchers and regulators around the world to end tests
on animals. In addition, since the FDA was given the
authority to regulate tobacco in 2009, PETA has
submitted scientific comments on numerous occasions,
urging the agency not to require tests on animals and
allow tobacco companies to submit data from modern
non-animal tests. PETA began a shareholder campaign in
2005 by filing a resolution with Altria Group, formerly
Philip Morris Companies, Inc. PETA then filed shareholder
resolutions with Philip Morris International and R.J.
Reynolds Tobacco Company, calling on them to end
experiments on animals. In 2013, Lorillard Tobacco
Company (which R.J. Reynolds purchased in 2014) issued
a policy banning all animal testing unless such tests
become required by federal regulations in the future.
Other companies, such as Imperial Brands and British
American Tobacco, have since made similar
commitments.

What You Can Do

Tell the CTP to follow the lead of other countries by

banning tobacco product and ingredient tests on animals.

FDA Center for Tobacco Products (CTP)

E-mail: AskCTP@fda.hhs.gov
Twitter: @FDATobacco /https://twitter.com/FDATobacco
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/FDA

References
1
Wallonian Government (Belgium). “Animal Welfare in
Wallonia. Article D.66. 7. Accessed December 22, 2021.
2
Parve V, Glasa J. National Regulations on Ethics and
Research in Estonia. European Commission; 2004.
3
Government of Germany. Animal Welfare Act. §7a(4).
Accessed December 22, 2021.
4
Glasa J, National Regulations on Ethics and Research in
Slovak Republic. European Commission; 2004.
5
Home Office. Guidance on the Operation of the Animals
(Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. Chapter 5, Sec. 5.23.
Accessed December 22, 2021.
6
Zhu L et al., “Repression of CC16 by cigarette smoke
(CS) exposure,” PLoS One. 2015;10(1):e0116159.
7
Bernard A et al. “Clara cell protein in serum and
bronchoalveolar lavage,” Eur Respir J. 1992;5(10):1231-
1238. Accessed December 22, 2021.