Organisms Commons^™

Noncompliance With Public Health Service (Phs) Policy On Humane Care And Use Of Laboratory Animals: An Exploratory Analysis, Leah M. Gomez, Kathleen Conlee, Martin Stephens

Martin Stephens, PhD

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is a major biomedical research-funding body in the United States. Approximately 40% of NIH-funded research involves experimentation on nonhuman animals (Monastersky, 2008). Institutions that conduct animal research with NIH funds must adhere to the Public Health Service (PHS) care and use standards of the Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare (OLAW, 2002a). Institutions deviating significantly from the PHS’s animal care and use standards must report these incidents to the NIH’s OLAW. This study is an exploratory analysis of all the significant deviations reported by animal-research facilities to OLAW during a 3-month period. The study identifies …

Addressing Distress And Pain In Animal Research: The Veterinary, Research, Societal, Regulatory And Ethical Contexts For Moving Forward, Kathleen Conlee, Martin Stephens, Andrew N. Rowan

Martin Stephens, PhD

While most people recognize that biomedical scientists are searching for knowledge that will improve the health of humans and animals, the image of someone deliberately causing harm to an animal in order to produce data that may lead to some future benefit has always prompted an uncomfortable reaction outside the laboratory. However, proponents of animal research have usually justified the practice by reference to greater benefits (new knowledge and medical treatments) over lesser costs (in animal suffering and death). Given that one of the costs of animal research is the suffering experienced by the animals, the goal of eliminating distress …

The Minimization Of Research Animal Distress And Pain: Conclusions And Recommendations, Kathleen Conlee, Martin Stephens, Andrew N. Rowan

Martin Stephens, PhD

While the attention given to preventing, assessing, and alleviating pain in research animals has increased noticeably in recent decades, much remains to be done both in terms of implementing best practices and conducting studies to answer outstanding questions. In contrast, the attention to distress (particularly non-pain induced distress) has shown no comparable increase. There are many reasons for this discrepancy, including the conceptual untidiness of the distress concept, the paucity of pharmacological treatments for distress, and perceived lack of regulatory emphasis on distress. These are challenges that need to be addressed and overcome. This book is intended to help meet …

Resolving Animal Distress And Pain: Principles And Examples Of Good Practice In Various Fields Of Research, Alicia Karas, Matthew C. Leach, Karl A. Andrutis, Kathleen Conlee, John P. Gluck, Andrew N. Rowan, Martin L. Stephens

Martin Stephens, PhD

Pain and distress are central topics in legislation, regulations, and standards regarding the use of animals in research. However, in practice, pain has received greatly increased attention in recent years, while attention to distress has lagged far behind, especially for distress that is not induced by pain. A contributing factor is that there is less information readily available on distress, including practical information on its recognition, assessment and alleviation.

This chapter attempts to help fill that void by reversing the usual pattern and giving greater attention to distress than to pain. In addition, we also bypass the pain versus distress …

Recognition Of Distress In Animals – A Philosophical Prolegomenon, Bernard E. Rollin

Bernard Rollin, PhD

For those who continue to doubt the studiability of distress or suffering or misery in all of its forms in animals, consider the following thought experiment: If the government were to come up with a billion dollars in research funding for animal distress, would that money go a-begging? We can study these states just as we studied pain—excellent work on boredom by Franciose Wemelsfelder in a volume on laboratory animal welfare I co-edited made the methodology for such study quite explicit. (Wemelsfelder, 1990) And when the ideological scales fall from our eyes, we realize that the work of scientists like …

Psychology And Its Animal Subjects, Kenneth J. Shapiro

Kenneth J. Shapiro, PhD

By way of introducing Psychologists for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PsyETA) to readers of the journal, I have been asked to make some comments about the organization and, from a personal point of view, to suggest some of my own positions and views.

The Harmful, Nontherapeutic Use Of Animals In Research Is Morally Wrong, Nathan Nobis

Nathan M. Nobis, PhD

It is argued that using animals in research is morally wrong when the research is nontherapeutic and harmful to the animals. This article discusses methods of moral reasoning and discusses how arguments on this and other bioethical issues might be defended and critiqued. A basic method of moral argument analysis is presented and used to show that common objections to the view that “animal research is morally wrong” fail: ie, common arguments for the view that “animal research is morally permissible” are demonstrably unsound or in need of defense. It is argued that the best explanations why harmful, nontherapeutic research …

Interests And Harms In Primate Research, Nathan Nobis

Nathan M. Nobis, PhD

The article discusses the moral issues on primate research in reference to the moral defenses by Sughrue and colleagues. It states that Sughrue and colleagues have claimed to provide equal examination of the primate stroke research's ethics. It mentions that the promise to straighten out a number of ethical arguments in favor and against primate research was not fulfilled. Several moral arguments are presented in response to Sughrue and colleagues' moral defense for animal experimentation.

Resolving Animal Distress And Pain: Principles And Examples Of Good Practice In Various Fields Of Research, Alicia Karas, Matthew C. Leach, Karl A. Andrutis, Kathleen Conlee, John P. Gluck, Andrew N. Rowan, Martin L. Stephens

Andrew N. Rowan, DPhil

Pain and distress are central topics in legislation, regulations, and standards regarding the use of animals in research. However, in practice, pain has received greatly increased attention in recent years, while attention to distress has lagged far behind, especially for distress that is not induced by pain. A contributing factor is that there is less information readily available on distress, including practical information on its recognition, assessment and alleviation.

This chapter attempts to help fill that void by reversing the usual pattern and giving greater attention to distress than to pain. In addition, we also bypass the pain versus distress …

Addressing Distress And Pain In Animal Research: The Veterinary, Research, Societal, Regulatory And Ethical Contexts For Moving Forward, Kathleen Conlee, Martin Stephens, Andrew N. Rowan

Andrew N. Rowan, DPhil

While most people recognize that biomedical scientists are searching for knowledge that will improve the health of humans and animals, the image of someone deliberately causing harm to an animal in order to produce data that may lead to some future benefit has always prompted an uncomfortable reaction outside the laboratory. However, proponents of animal research have usually justified the practice by reference to greater benefits (new knowledge and medical treatments) over lesser costs (in animal suffering and death). Given that one of the costs of animal research is the suffering experienced by the animals, the goal of eliminating distress …

The Minimization Of Research Animal Distress And Pain: Conclusions And Recommendations, Kathleen Conlee, Martin Stephens, Andrew N. Rowan

Andrew N. Rowan, DPhil

While the attention given to preventing, assessing, and alleviating pain in research animals has increased noticeably in recent decades, much remains to be done both in terms of implementing best practices and conducting studies to answer outstanding questions. In contrast, the attention to distress (particularly non-pain induced distress) has shown no comparable increase. There are many reasons for this discrepancy, including the conceptual untidiness of the distress concept, the paucity of pharmacological treatments for distress, and perceived lack of regulatory emphasis on distress. These are challenges that need to be addressed and overcome. This book is intended to help meet …

Examining The Regulatory Value Of Multi-Route Mammalian Acute Systemic Toxicity Studies, Troy Seidle, Pilar Prieto, Anna Bulgheroni

Troy Seidle, PhD

Regulatory information requirements for pesticides call for submission of acute systemic toxicity data for up to three different exposure routes (oral, dermal, inhalation) for both active ingredients and formulated products. Similar multi-route testing is required in the European Union and elsewhere for industrial chemicals. To determine the value of acute toxicity testing by more than one route, oral-dermal and oralinhalation concordances among regulatory classifications were examined for large data sets of chemicals and pesticide active ingredients. Across all sectors examined, oral acute toxicity classifications for pure active substances were more severe than those derived from dermal data in more than …

The Development Of New Concepts For Assessing Reproductive Toxicity Applicable To Large Scale Toxicological Programmes, S. Bremer, C. Pellizzer, S. Hoffmann, T. Seidle, T. Hartung

Troy Seidle, PhD

Large scale toxicological testing programmes which are currently ongoing such as the new European chemical legislation REACH require the development of new integrated testing strategies rather than applying traditional testing schemes to thousands of chemicals. The current practice of requiring in vivo testing for every possible adverse effect endanger the success of these programmes due (i) to limited testing facilities and sufficient capacity of scientific/technical knowledge for reproductive toxicity; (ii) an unacceptable number of laboratory animals involved (iii) an intolerable number of chemicals classified as false positive.

A key aspect of the implementation of new testing strategies is the determination …

A Modular One-Generation Reproduction Study As A Flexible Testing System For Regulatory Safety Assessment, Richard Vogel, Troy Seidle, Horst Spielmann

Troy Seidle, PhD

The European Union’s Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals (REACH) legislation mandates testing and evaluation of approximately 30,000 existing substances within a short period of time, beginning with the most widely used “high production volume” (HPV) chemicals. REACH testing requirements for the roughly 3000 HPV chemicals specify three separate tests for reproductive toxicity: two developmental toxicity studies on different animal species (OECD Test Guideline 414) and a two-generation reproduction toxicity study (OECD TG 416). These studies are highly costly in both economic and animal welfare terms. OECD TG 416 is a fertility study intended to evaluate reproductive performance of animals …

Humane Society International’S Global Campaign To End Animal Testing, Troy Seidle

Troy Seidle, PhD

The Research & Toxicology Department of Humane Society International (HSI) operates a multifaceted and science-driven global programme aimed at ending the use of animals in toxicity testing and research. The key strategic objectives include: a) ending cosmetics animal testing worldwide, via the multinational Be Cruelty-Free campaign; b) achieving near-term reductions in animal testing requirements through revision of product sector regulations; and c) advancing humane science by exposing failing animal models of human disease and shifting science funding toward human biology-based research and testing tools fit for the 21st century. HSI was instrumental in ensuring the implementation of the March 2013 …

The Three Rs: The Way Forward, Michael Balls, Alan M. Goldberg, Julia H. Fentem, Caren L. Broadhead, Rex L. Burch, Michael F.W. Festing, John M. Frazier, Coenraad F.M. Hendriksen, Margaret Jennings, Margot D.O. Van Der Kamp, David B. Morton, Andrew N. Rowan, Claire Russell, William M.S. Russell, Horst Spielmann, Martin Stephens, William S. Stokes, Donald W. Straughan, James D. Yager, Joanne Zurlo, Bert F.M. Van Zutphen

Andrew N. Rowan, DPhil

This is the report of the eleventh of a series of workshops organised by the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM), which was established in 1991 by the European Commission. ECVAM's main goal, as defined in 1993 by its Scientific Advisory Committee, is to promote the scientific and regulatory acceptance of alternative methods which are of importance to the biosciences and which reduce, refine or replace the use of laboratory animals. One of the first priorities set by ECVAM was the implementation of procedures which would enable it to become well-informed about the state-of-the-art of non-animal test …

Carbon Dioxide For Euthanasia: Concerns Regarding Pain And Distress, With Special Reference To Mice And Rats, Kathleen Conlee, Martin Stephens, Andrew N. Rowan, Lesley A. King

Andrew N. Rowan, DPhil

Carbon dioxide (CO₂) is the most commonly used agent for euthanasia of laboratory rodents, used on an estimated tens of millions of laboratory rodents per year worldwide, yet there is a growing body of evidence indicating that exposure to CO₂ causes more than momentary pain and distress in these and other animals. We reviewed the available literature on the use of CO₂ for euthanasia (as well as anaesthesia) and also informally canvassed laboratory animal personnel for their opinions regarding this topic. Our review addresses key issues such as CO₂ flow rate and final concentration, presence …

Possibilities For Refinement And Reduction: Future Improvements Within Regulatory Testing, Martin L. Stephens, Kathleen Conlee, Gina Alvino, Andrew N. Rowan

Andrew N. Rowan, DPhil

Approaches and challenges to refining and reducing animal use in regulatory testing are reviewed. Regulatory testing accounts for the majority of animals reported in the most painful and/or distressful categories in the United States and Canada. Refinements in testing, including the use of humane endpoints, are of increasing concern. Traditional approaches to reduction (e.g., improving experimental design) are being supplemented with complementary approaches, such as the use of tier testing to eliminate some chemicals prior to in vivo testing. Technological advances in telemetry and noninvasive techniques will help decrease either the demand for animals in testing or animal suffering. Further …

A Vision Becoming Reality, Gill Langley

Gill Langley, PhD

Non-animal science in toxicology and health research has been progressing for decades, but only now is it being seen widely as advanced science. The emergence of novel human biology-based tools and models, combined with legislative and regulatory change, a 21st century concept for toxicology, continuing failures in the drug pipeline, and systematic critiques of animal models, have created a pivotal moment of change. The leading edge is starting to become the norm. Humans and other animals are likely to benefit as a result.

Estimates For Worldwide Laboratory Animal Use In 2005, Katy Taylor, Nicky Gordon, Gill Langley, Wendy Higgins

Gill Langley, PhD

Animal experimentation continues to generate public and political concern worldwide. Relatively few countries collate and publish animal use statistics, yet this is a first and essential step toward public accountability and an informed debate, as well as being important for effective policy-making and regulation. The implementation of the Three Rs (replacement, reduction and refinement of animal experiments) should be expected to result in a decline in animal use, but without regular, accurate statistics, this cannot be monitored. Recent estimates of worldwide annual laboratory animal use are imprecise and unsubstantiated, ranging from 28–100 million. We collated data for 37 countries that …

Volunteer Studies In Pain Research — Opportunities And Challenges To Replace Animal Experiments: The Report And Recommendations Of A Focus On Alternatives Workshop, C. K. Langley, Q. Aziz, C. Bountra, N. Gordon, P. Hawkins, A. Jones, G. Langley, T. Nurmikko, I. Tracey

Gill Langley, PhD

Despite considerable research, effective and safe treatments for human pain disorders remain elusive. Understanding the biology of different human pain conditions and researching effective treatments continue to be dominated by animal models, some of which are of limited value. British and European legislation demands that non-animal approaches should be considered before embarking on research using experimental animals. Recent scientific and technical developments, particularly in human neuroimaging, offer the potential to replace some animal procedures in the study of human pain. A group of pain research experts from academia and industry met with the aim of exploring creatively the tools, strategies …

Considering A New Paradigm For Alzheimer’S Disease Research, Gillian R. Langley

Gill Langley, PhD

Using Alzheimer’s disease as a case study, this review argues that it might be time to consider a new paradigm in medical research and drug discovery. The existing framework is overly dependent on often unvalidated animal models, particularly transgenic mice. Translational success remains elusive and costly late-stage drug failure is common. The conventional paradigm tends to overlook species differences and assumes that animal-based findings are generally applicable to humans. Could pathways-based research using advanced human-specific models probed with new tools, including those of systems biology, take centre stage? The current transition in chemical toxicology to a 21st-century paradigm could be …

The Validity Of Animal Experiments In Medical Research, Gill Langley

Gill Langley, PhD

Other animals, such as mice, rats, rabbits, dogs and monkeys, are widely used as surrogates for humans in fundamental medical research. This involves creating disorders in animals by chemical, surgical or genetic means, with the aim of mimicking selected aspects of human illnesses. It is a truism that any model or surrogate is not identical to the target being modelled. So, in medical research, experiments using animals or cell cultures or even healthy volunteers instead of patients (being the target population with the target illness) will inevitably have limitations, although these will be greater or lesser depending on the model.

Evaluation Of Awarded Grant Applications Involving Animal Experimentation, Michael W. Fox, M. Andrea Ward, Andrew N. Rowan, Barbara Jaffe

Andrew N. Rowan, DPhil

The potential benefits of animal research are accepted by most. However, painstaking care must be applied to the approach and design of the research to ensure the best possible chance of achieving the research objectives and to minimize both physical and psychological distress to the animals. Consideration should be given not only to transport and housing conditions, but also to practices used in the laboratory. Adequate reasons must also be given as to why the research is necessary.

Public concern over the use and care of laboratory animals in biomedical programs contributed to the passage of the Animal Welfare Act …

Evaluation Of Awarded Grant Applications Involving Animal Experimentation, Michael W. Fox, M. Andrea Ward, Andrew N. Rowan

Andrew N. Rowan, D.Phil.

The potential benefits of animal research are accepted by most. However, painstaking care must be applied to the approach and design of the research to ensure the best possible chance of achieving the research objectives and to minimize both physical and psychological distress to the animals. Consideration should be given not only to transport and housing conditions, but also to practices used in the laboratory. Adequate reasons must also be given as to why the research is necessary. Public concern over the use and care of laboratory animals in biomedical programs contributed to the passage of the Animal Welfare Act …

Scientists And Animal Research: Dr. Jekyll Or Mr. Hyde?, Andrew N. Rowan

Andrew N. Rowan, DPhil

Why is the public so sensitive about the use of a few tens of millions of animals in research when they do not object to killing hundreds of millions of pigs and cows and billions of chickens for our meat diet? Why is animal research considered so bad despite the public's high opinion of science (and scientists)? Perhaps it is the image of the scientist as an objective and cold individual who deliberately inflicts harm (pain, distress, or death) on his (the public image is usually male) innocent animal victims that arouses so much horror and concern. This paper does …