It’s a Male World: The sexual bias of animal models in Biology
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3989/arbor.2019.791n1005Keywords:
Animal models, sex bias, Organizational-Activational HypothesisAbstract
In this work we will analyze from a metatheoretical viewpoint animal models and their use in research within the life sciences. Beginning with the evaluation of a number of scientific works denouncing a sex bias in research practices using such models, we search for the implicit theoretical assumptions which provide its foundations and argue that, far from being a methodological mistake, they are part of an extensive tradition ubiquitous in the history of biology. On the other hand, we expose the theoretical motives for replacing those assumptions, by taking into account the historical and philosophical analyses of the sex differentiation’ standard theory (the Organizational-Activational Hypothesis).
Downloads
References
Arnold, A. P. (2009). The Organizational- Activational Hypothesis as the Foundation for a Unified Theory of Sexual Differentiation of all Mammalian Tissues. Hormones and Behavior, 55 (5), pp. 570-578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yhbeh.2009.03.011 PMid:19446073 PMCid:PMC3671905
Atanasova, N. (2015). Validating Animal Models. Theoria, 30 (2), pp. 163-181. https://doi.org/10.1387/theoria.12761
Beach, F. A. (1975). Hormonal Modification of Sexually Dimorphic Behavior. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 1 (1), pp. 3-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/0306-4530(75)90019-0
Beach, F. A. y Holz, A. M. (1946). Mating Behavior in Male Rats Castrated at Various Ages and Injected with Androgen. Journal of Experimental Zoology, 101 (1), pp. 91-142. https://doi.org/10.1002/jez.1401010107
Beach, F. A., Noble, R. G. y Orndoff, R. K. (1969). Effects of Perinatal Androgen Treatment on Responses of Male Rats to Gonadal Hormones in Adulthood. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 68 (4), pp. 490-497. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0027658
Beery, A. K. y Zucker, I. (2011). Sex Bias in Neuroscience and Biomedical Research. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 35 (3), pp. 565-572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2010.07.002 PMid:20620164 PMCid:PMC3008499
Birke, L., Faulkner, W., Janson-Somith, D. y Overfield, K. (eds.) (1980). Alice through the microscope: the power of science over women's lives. London: Virago.
Blanchard, C. D., Griebel G. y Blanchard R. J. (1995). Gender Bias in the Preclinical Psychopharmacology of Anxiety: Male Models for (Predominantly) Female Disorders. Journal of Psychopharmacology, 9 (2), pp. 79-82. https://doi.org/10.1177/026988119500900201 PMid:22298732
Calabrese, E. (1985). Uncertainty Factors and Interindividual Variation. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology. 5 (2), pp. 190-196. https://doi.org/10.1016/0273-2300(85)90032-7
Connell, S. (2000). Aristotle and Galen on Sex Difference and Reproduction: a New Approach to an Ancient Rivalry. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 31 (3), pp. 405-427. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1369-8486(00)00007-8
Cynowiec E. (2017). Análisis epistemológico de la construcción y utilización de modelos animales para el estudio de alteraciones psiquiátricas humanas. [Tesis doctoral inédita]. Buenos Aires: Universidad de Buenos Aires.
Danchakoff, V. (1938). La folliculine dans l'histogenèse sexuelle de l'embryon des Mammifères. Comptes Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences, 206, pp. 945-947.
Díez, J. A. (2002). Explicación, unificación y subsunción. En González, W. J. (ed.). Pluralidad de la explicación científica. Barcelona: Ariel, pp. 73-93.
Fine, C. (2010). Delusions of Gender: How Our Minds, Society, and Neurosexism Create Difference. New York: W. W. Norton.
Fink, G., Pfaf, D. y Levine, J. (2011). Handbook of Neuroendocrinology. Oxford: Academic Press.
Giere, R. N. (2010). An Agent-Based Conception of Models and Scientific Representation. Synthese. 172 (2), pp. 269- 281. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-009-9506-z
Harding, S. (1986). The Science Question in Feminism. New York: Cornell University.
Hedges, S. (2002). The Origin and Evolution of Model Organism. Nature Reviews Genetics, 3 (11), pp. 838-849. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg929 PMid:12415314
Hempel, C. G. (1988). Provisoes: A Problem Concerning the Inferential Function of Scientific Theories. Erkenntnis. 28 (2), pp. 147-164. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00166441
Houtsmuller E. J., Brand, T., de Jonge F. H., Joosten, R. N., van de Poll, N. E. y Slob, A. K. (1994). SDN-POA Volume, Sexual Behavior, and Partner Preference of Male Rats Affected by Perinatal Treatment with ATD. Physiology & Behavior, 56 (3), pp. 535-541. https://doi.org/10.1016/0031-9384(94)90298-4
Keller, E. F. (2002). Making Sense of Life: Explaining Biological Development with Models, Metaphors and Machines. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Keller, E. F. (2004). What impact, if any, has feminism had on science. Journal of Bioscience, 29 (1), pp. 7-13. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02702556
Klinge, I. y Wiesemann, C. (eds.) (2010). Sex and Gender in Biomedicine: Theories, Methodologies, Results. Göttinger Universitätsverlag. https://doi.org/10.17875/gup2010-394
Laqueur, T. (1994). La construcción del sexo: cuerpo y género desde los griegos hasta Freud. Madrid: Cátedra.
Lombardi, O., Acorinti, H. y Martínez, J. C. (2016). Modelos científicos: el problema de la representación. Scientiae Studia, 14 (1), pp. 151-174. https://doi.org/10.11606/S1678-31662016000100008
Longino, H. E. (1997). Feminismo y filosofía de la ciencia. En: González, M. I., López Cerezo, J. A. y Luján, J. L. Ciencia, tecnología y sociedad. Barcelona: Ariel, pp. 71-83.
McCarthy, M. M. y Arnold, A. P. (2011). Reframing Sexual Differentiation of the Brain. Nature Neuroscience, 14 (6), pp. 677-683. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.2834 PMid:21613996 PMCid:PMC3165173
McCarthy, M. M., Arnold, A. P., Ball, G., Blaustein, J. y de Vries, G. (2012). Sex Differences in the Brain: the not so Inconvenient Truth. The Journal of Neuroscience, 32 (7), pp. 2241-2247. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5372-11.2012 PMid:22396398 PMCid:PMC3295598
Phoenix, C., Goy, R., Gerall, A. y Young, W. C. (1959). Organizing Action of Prenatally Administered Testosterone Propionate on the Tissues Mediating Mating Behavior in the Female Guinea Pig. Endocrinology, 65 (3), pp. 369-382. https://doi.org/10.1210/endo-65-3-369 PMid:14432658
Rose, N. y Abi-Rached, J. M. (2013). Neuro: The New Brain Sciences and the Management of the Mind. Princeton: Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400846337
Sánchez, E. (ed.) (1994). Aristóteles. Reproducción de los animales. Madrid: Gredos.
Simerly, R. B. (2002). Wired for Reproduction: Organization and Development of Sexually Dimorphic Circuits in the Mammalian Forebrain. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 25 (1), pp. 507-536. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.neuro.25.112701.142745 PMid:12052919
Suárez, M. (2003). Scientific Representation: Against Similarity and Isomorphism. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 17 (3), pp. 225-244. https://doi.org/10.1080/0269859032000169442
Sullivan, J. A. (2009). The Multiplicity of Experimental Protocols: A Challenge to Reductionist and Non-Reductionist Models of the Unity of Neuroscience. Synthese, 167 (3), pp. 511-539. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-008-9389-4
The Hazards of Seldane (1997, 17 de enero). New York Times. [En línea]. Disponible en http://www.nytimes.com/1997/01/17/ opinion/the-hazards-of-seldane.html
Valls-Llobet, C. (2009). Mujeres, salud y poder. Madrid: Cátedra.
Velayos Castelo, C. (2013). La frontera animal-humano. Arbor, 189 (763), a065. https://doi.org/10.3989/arbor.2013.763n5002
Wald, C. y Wu, C. (2010). Of Mice and Women: The Bias in Animal Models. Science, 327, pp. 1571-1572. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.327.5973.1571 PMid:20339045
Wijngaard, M van den (1997). Reinventing the Sexes: The Biomedical Construction of Femininity and Masculinity. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Wizemann, T. M. (2012). Sex-Specific Reporting of Scientific Research. A Workshop Summary. Washington: National Academies Press.
Wizemann, T. M. y Pardue, M. (2001). Exploring the Biological Contributions to Human Health. Does Sex Matter? Washington: National Academies Press.
Young, W. C., Dempsey, E. W. y Myers, H. I. (1935). Cyclic Reproductive Behavior in the Female Guinea Pig. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 19 (2), pp. 313-335. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0060351
Zuk, M. (2002). Sexual Selections: What We Can and Can't Learn about Sex from Animals. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Otros recursos
Drug Safety: Most Drugs Withdrawn in Recent Years had Greater Health Risks for Women. United States General Accounting Office (January 19, 2001). [En línea]. Disponible en: https://www.gao. gov/new.items/d01286r.pdf
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2019 Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
© CSIC. Manuscripts published in both the printed and online versions of this Journal are the property of Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, and quoting this source is a requirement for any partial or full reproduction.
All contents of this electronic edition, except where otherwise noted, are distributed under a “Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International” (CC BY 4.0) License. You may read the basic information and the legal text of the license. The indication of the CC BY 4.0 License must be expressly stated in this way when necessary.
Self-archiving in repositories, personal webpages or similar, of any version other than the published by the Editor, is not allowed.
