You might be surprised how often animal research pops up in media over the last 50 years. The thing is, it’s rarely a story in itself. It’s a catalyst, a set-up for the human story being told.

We see non-human animals used as narrative shorthand—foreshadowing a human tragedy or setting up a villain’s lab.

And here’s why I want to shine more of a spotlight on it: Stories matter.

They don’t just help us see a new perspective; they can entrench existing ones and normalise behaviour and attitudes that would be otherwise unacceptable. Stories can challenge us or offer us solidarity.

So, I want to explore animal research in fictional media and the way it impacts how we think about animal research in the non-fictional world.

Specifically, those I believe are representative of wider trends:

• We do not give space or time to explore a non-human animal’s experiences
• Experiences non-human animals go through are used to frame human experiences

Also, I’ll warn you now: spoilers ahead – mostly for 20-year-old movies, but still, you’ve been warned.

28 days later

I know it’s now 28 years later and there are bone temples and all sorts in the franchise now, but I want to take you all the way back to the very first movie.

It opens on a visceral scene: a primate strapped to a chair, forced to watch a multitude of screens showing violence and rage. The primate is, understandably, agitated. When animal activists burst into the room to free them, it’s already too late—the primate has been infected by a “Rage Virus” and bites their would-be-liberators. Just like that, the virus is unleashed across Britain.

So, who’s to blame?

• The primate, who passed on the virus?
• The animal activists who freed the primate?
• The researchers who created a rage virus and infected a sentient creature with it?
• The shadowy funders who financed this work in the first place?

I know where I’d place my blame. It isn’t with the primate or the activists; it’s hard to justify the creation of a virus designed for aggression and then be shocked when it behaves exactly as intended.

But the franchise isn’t interested in exploring this (which is fine!). We don’t learn how many animals were used to create the virus, and we never see what happens to the primate from the opening scene. They are simply a plot device to kickstart the human story. We don’t explore the morality of why this kind of research was deemed “necessary” in the first place; we just accept the fallout.

For All Mankind

For All Mankind is a sci-fi show that looks at a simple question: what if Russia put a man on the moon first?

But, everything up until that moment is the same… Including Laika.

If you don’t know the story of Laika, in a nutshell, during the Space Race, the Soviet Union sent a stray dog into space. She was the first animal to orbit Earth, plucked from the streets of Moscow for her size and agreeable nature. In Russian, her name translates to ‘yapper’.

The mission had always been one-way. There had never been a plan for Laika to come home, but even that story was romanticised for some time.

For years, the public story was that Laika had a wonderful journey and died peacefully in orbit days later after eating poisoned food. In reality, it’s believed she died of stress and overheating within hours of launch.

In the show, there’s a debate between a Russian cosmonaut and an American astronaut.

The American believes in the romance of Laika. Even if she didn’t know she was going to die, she was “happy” with her role. The scientists had become her family, and she was pleased to serve them.

The cosmonaut, who had actually met Laika and remembered her bright eyes and wet nose, thinks this is just a story people tell themselves so they can feel better about the cost.

Laika was sent to space because humans wanted to see what happened. It’s a debate between choosing to die and having your life taken.

Pinky and the Brain

Children’s television just used to be darker.

Here are some of the theme song lyrics:

“One is a genius, the other’s insane.
They’re laboratory mice.
Their genes have been spliced.
They’re dinky, they’re Pinky and the Brain, Brain, Brain, Brain,”

The entire premise is about genetically engineered mice who are trying to take over the world… Before they’re foiled and slink back to their lab cages.

It’s played for laughs. And I won’t pretend I was above that. As a kid who loved rodents, I looked forward to watching Pinky and the Brain.

I loved the odd-man pairing of the two… But I was a young child and never really dug into the horror that fed the underbelly of the show. It was Frankenstein-like in its depiction of laboratories, but that was the joke.

The electrocution and inflicted brain damage were part of the joke.

It’s maybe not surprising that we can so easily glance over animal research.

Why it matters: from the screen to society

When animals are treated as side characters or narrative tools, we risk internalising the philosophy of anthropocentrism. This is the belief that humans are the only significant entities in the world and that our interests always take precedence over the lives of others.

We’ll always centre stories around the human experience because it’s the only one we truly know. But we can challenge ourselves to try and look beyond it, even a little.

Mice and dogs don’t give their lives for us; we take them. It’s a vital distinction. By acknowledging it, we can move away from the “mad scientist” tropes of Pinky and the Brain or the tragedy of Laika, and instead focus on what’s actually possible today.

We like to talk about humans’ special brains and abilities to do what no other species can… So, let’s put that to the test and create a science that doesn’t rely on these outdated narrative tropes. We can move towards sophisticated, human-relevant methods—like organ-on-a-chip technology or advanced computer modelling—that don’t require a “catalyst” of animal suffering to find answers.

If we want to live within the world rather than outside it, a great place to start is by changing the stories we tell and the words we use.

So what can we do?

Next time you see a ‘lab animal’ on screen, ask yourself: is this a story about them, or just a story about us?

At Replacing Animal Research, we’re working to ensure that in the real world, no animal suffers for science… And maybe we’ll start to see stories that reflect that too.