Its proper use is to generate ideas about the target disorder. These, themselves, by their very nature are never conclusive. They always require validation in a human setting. On the other side, animal rights people often dismiss an animal model by pointing out differences between the model and the disorder in humans. The fact that an animal model is dissimilar from the targeted disorder in certain features, while compelling, is not a strong argument.
Differences can sometimes be informative.
If individuals in one species do not contract a disease and those in another do, studying the differences can provide insight into the disorder. The bottom line is whether we increase our understanding or the effectiveness of our treatment through the development of the model. In order to make a more effective and persuasive case, animal rights advocates need to justify their positions with careful evaluative methods. The APA Council of Representatives recently approved funding for pro-research films to be shown in high schools and colleges. The APA Science Directorate sponsored a workshop and designed legislative packets to lobby for more animal research.