Question follow-through · 31293
Medicine: Animal Experiments
To ask the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of using technologies such as (a) organ-on-a-chip and (b) computer modelling to reduce the number of animals used in medical research
About this written question
A written question asks a government minister for information in writing. Parliament publishes the question and any answer.
- Answering body
- Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
- Tabled
- 12 Feb 2025
- Target answer date
- 24 Feb 2025
- Answer
- 28 Feb 2025 · 16 calendar days after tabling
Elapsed calendar days describe the record timeline, not whether Parliament considers an answer on time.
Votes on this topic
- Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Second Reading · 11 Sept 2026
- Health Bill: Report Stage: Amendment 1 · 8 Sept 2026
- Health Bill: Report Stage: New Clause 143 · 8 Sept 2026
These Commons divisions share a topic label. The question did not necessarily lead to a vote.
Recorded timeline
12 Feb 2025
Question tabled
To ask the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of using technologies such as (a) organ-on-a-chip and (b) computer modelling to reduce the number of animals used in medical research
24 Feb 2025
Target answer date
Date supplied by the official written-questions record.
28 Feb 2025
Answer published
Phasing out animal testing where possible is a clear goal of this government and innovative technologies, such as organ-on-a-chip, are essential to delivering this ambition.The Government invests £10m annually in The National Centre for the Replacement, R...
Official data retrieved 28 Sept 2026.
Later records
Possible follow-up questions
Strong links require the same MP, department and exact heading. Other same-department questions are shown as unreviewed candidates, not as confirmed follow-ups. No debate link is asserted unless a stable source relationship exists.
No later same-department questions indexed.
This is an absence in covered public data, not evidence that no follow-up occurred elsewhere.