‘Always, Clementine’

I recently picked up ‘Always, Clementine’ by Carlie Sorosiak from the middle grade section of a bookshop in Newcastle. It’s written for children aged 8-12 years about a genetically engineered mouse called Clementine who is ‘rescued’ from a lab. It’s a great story–easy to read, thought-provoking, sweet, funny–but it also left me feeling disappointed, so I thought I’d write about it here.

Clementine is a clever little mouse, and has been ‘freed’ by Felix, one of the researchers in the lab. Felix has good intentions, though not much of a plan, eventually dropping Clementine and littermate Hamlet into the mailbox of a much-loved TV presenter. The story is told by Clementine herself through a series of letters she writes in her mind to Rosie, a chimpanzee that she befriended in the lab. Much of the book is spent with Clementine missing Rosie, wishing she was back in the lab with her (hence ‘rescued’ and ‘freed’).

We learn that the mice are part of an experiment to improve human intelligence, ironic in a time in which artificial intelligence is changing everything around us, the way we work, the jobs we do, the way that medicines are developed and approved. Indeed, the lab that created the mice are so desperate to have them back to cut out and study their brains–yes, I did say it’s a children’s book–that they mount a big media campaign, urging the public to look for them. One of the researchers hires an ice cream van and pretends to be an ice cream seller, putting up posters all around the park in an effort to locate the lost mice.

I find it interesting what we as individuals can accept or not accept as fiction. Often over the years, I’d be watching sci-fi or some other fictional drama on the television about science, maybe set in a science lab, or some other thing that resonates in some way deeply with me, such that I can get caught up, shouting at the screen. We have a mantra in our house for times like that, “It’s not real,” and I think my disappointment with ‘Always, Clementine’ is a bit like this—I must be reminded, “It’s not real”.

I have worked in medical research for nearly 20 years, and almost all of the labs that I’ve worked in have carried out research on animals, to a greater or a lesser extent. All of the work has gone through rigorous ethical approval before being carried out—research seeking to improve human intelligence would thankfully never be approved—and I’ve never met a researcher who didn’t care or wasn’t grateful for the lives of the animals they work with.

My concern is that, as a child reading this book, with no other input as to what ‘researchers’ are like (the lab workers are referred to as ‘researchers’ all the way through, not ‘scientists’) or what animal research means, then could this book shape your early understanding of this subject? That all ‘researchers’ are bad, that all animal research is bad, when the truth is more complicated and warrants further understanding? Public opinion is crucial in determining whether new technologies are accepted or not, so is it right to be negatively shaping this understanding of science and research so early in life? And really, is this subject matter appropriate for a children’s book?

Great efforts are being made to reduce and ultimately replace animal testing in drug development, driven by public opinion and by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Modernisation Act 3.0. This bill requires the FDA to establish a process to support nonclinical testing methods for drug development that do not involve the use of animals. Researchers working in the microphysiological systems (MPS) field–which includes organ-chip and organoid technology–are striving to make laboratory models that are ever more physiologically-relevant, creating mini-environments more like those inside our bodies that can be used for drug screening, removing the need for testing on animals. To stop testing new medicines on animals, we will first need alternative methods of testing. We probably already have many of the models that are needed, but what is lacking is the rigorous rounds of testing and standards to be put in place. They need validation, and cross-validation by other labs, comparing the results with the animal data. We’re close with MPS models, but not quite there yet.

On this thought, I’ll leave you with my illustration of Clementine, a mouse so clever she can beat six humans at chess–at the same time!

Clementine, the chess-playing mouse, inspired by the book, ‘Always, Clementine,’ by Carlie Sorosiak

Further Reading

LaBonne, C. (2025) There is no replacement (yet) for animal models in medical research STAT. Accessed July 2, 2025.

Sorosiak, S. (2022) Always, Clementine. Nosy Crow Ltd., London, UK.