Despite aspirations to substitute animal experimentation with alternative methods and recent progress in the area of non-animal approaches, such as organoïds and organ(s)-on-a-chip technologies, there is no extensive replacement of animal-based research in biomedicine. In this paper, I will analyse this state of affairs with reference to key institutional and socio-epistemic barriers for the development and use of non-animal approaches in the context of biomedical research in Europe. I will argue that there exist several factors that inhibit change in this context. In particular, there is what I call “scientific inertia”, i.e. a certain degree of conservatism in scientific practice regarding the development and use of non-animal approaches to replace animal experimentation. This type of inertia is facilitated by socio-epistemic characteristics of animal-based research in the life sciences and is a key factor in understanding the status quo in biomedical research. The underlying reasons for scientific inertia have not received sufficient attention in the literature to date because the phenomenon transcends traditional disciplinary boundaries in the study of animal experimentation. This paper addresses this issue and seeks to contribute to a better understanding of scientific inertia by using a methodology that looks at the interplay of institutional, epistemic, and regulatory aspects of animal-based research.

尽管希望用替代方法替代动物实验，并且最近在非动物方法领域取得了进展，例如有机体和芯片上的器官技术，但在生物医学中并没有广泛替代以动物为基础的研究。在本文中，我将参考在欧洲生物医学研究背景下开发和使用非动物方法的关键制度和社会认知障碍来分析这种情况。我将争辩说，在这种情况下，存在一些抑制变化的因素。特别是，我称之为“科学惰性”，即在科学实践中关于开发和使用非动物方法来替代动物实验的某种程度的保守主义。生命科学中以动物为基础的研究的社会认知特征促进了这种惯性，并且是了解生物医学研究现状的关键因素。迄今为止，科学惰性的根本原因在文献中还没有得到足够的重视，因为这种现象在动物实验研究中超越了传统的学科界限。本文解决了这个问题，并试图通过使用一种研究基于动物的研究的制度、认知和监管方面的相互作用的方法来更好地理解科学惰性。迄今为止，科学惰性的根本原因在文献中还没有得到足够的重视，因为这种现象在动物实验研究中超越了传统的学科界限。本文解决了这个问题，并试图通过使用一种研究基于动物的研究的制度、认知和监管方面的相互作用的方法来更好地理解科学惰性。迄今为止，科学惰性的根本原因在文献中还没有得到足够的重视，因为这种现象在动物实验研究中超越了传统的学科界限。本文解决了这个问题，并试图通过使用一种研究基于动物的研究的制度、认知和监管方面的相互作用的方法来更好地理解科学惯性。