Animal Ethics ‘ The ethics of research involving animals’

1. Animal Ethics‘The ethics of research involving animals’ Prof. Dr. Frauke Ohl Division Laboratory Animal Science, Dept. Animals, Science & Society, DGK, UU

2. History • Greece: • +/-400 a.C. • 1st medical handbook • Corpus Hippocraticum

3. History basic knowledge on anatomy and physiology note experimental conditions!

4. History • Descartes, 17th century: • dualism mind/body - • animals do not have a soul; • thus: • no consciousness and no pain in animals • (insensate mashine)

5. History – Animal Protection Politics: 1875: Victoria Street Society – first anti-vivisection organisation 1876: Cruelty to Animals Act, UK – first law on protection of experimental animals 1985: Amendment to ‚Improved standard for the Laboratory Animal Act‘ Science: 2000: view on the use of animals in research by the European Science Foundation (ESF)

6. Russell and BurchThe Principles of Humane Experimental Techniques, 1959 Use of Laboratory Animals - Today The guiding principle of LAS • Replacement (alternatives?) • Reduction (numbers?) • Refinement (procedures?)

7. Laboratory Animal Science - Today needs of animals societal demands humane use welfare minimizing numbers advising policy makers discussion with society teaching Laboratory AnimalScience needs of scientists reliability feasibility (economic) efficiency

8. Laboratory Animal Science - Today • with upcoming discussion on the (justification of the) use of laboratory animals, specialists were needed for • advising policy organs (regulation) • supervision of welfare • teaching • research • as a consequence of the ‚Dutch Act on the Use of Laboratory Animals‘ (1977), the Chair of Laboratory Animal Science was founded at the University of Utrecht

9. Laboratory Animal Science - Today Legislation in the NL * Wet op de dierproeven (1977) * Dierproevenbesluit (1985) * Gewijzigde Wet op de dierproeven (1996)

10. Laboratory Animal Science - Today Regulation: • Animal experiments are restricted to (specific) scientific research and teaching and: • only if no alternative is available • only if the expected outcome outweighs the possible discomfort of experimental animals • each study has to beapproved by a ‘DEC’ • each study and animal has to be registered • people involved have to trained • animal welfare has to be closely monitored and supervised

11. Use of Laboratory Animals - Today - development of lab animal use in the UK

12. Use of Laboratory Animals - Today - development of lab animal use in the NL

13. Use of Laboratory Animals - Today - number of different species (2005), use of inbred strains

14. Use of Laboratory Animals - 3R‘s LAS specialist levels (Netherlands) Animal care taker/biotechnical assistant (art 12 = FELASA A,B) 2/3 year training (mbo-niveau) Researcher (art. 9 = FELASA C) Biomedical master + cursus LAS (80 hours) LAS specialist (art 14 = FELASA D) Veterinary Medicine/Biomedical Research + specialist training (1 year)

15. Use of Laboratory Animals - 3R‘s Supervision of health (welfare)

16. behavioural repertoire genetic manipulation strains reproduction age Use of Laboratory Animals - 3R‘s Recognition of specific demands

17. Use of Laboratory Animals - 3R‘s Induction of severe pain basically is forbidden

18. Use of Laboratory Animals - 3R‘s Avoiding (unnecessary) discomfort!

19. Use of Laboratory Animals - 3R‘s Assessment of discomfort?

20. Use of Laboratory Animals - 3R‘s Other refinements: species specific characteristics have impact on experimental results rat

21. Use of Laboratory Animals - 3R‘s Other refinements: housing conditions have impact on welfare and experimental results

22. Use of Laboratory Animals - 3R‘s social housing

23. Use of Laboratory Animals - 3R‘s procedures

24. Use of Laboratory Animals - 3R‘s Reduced numbers and… refined welfare…

25. Use of Laboratory Animals - ??? - use of animals for different purposes in the NL

26. Use of Laboratory Animals - ??? - cancer: animal models and patients in the NL

27. Debate • Debate on the validity of animal experiments: • acceptance of experimental medicine as contributing to • man`s welfare • evidence that development of medicine depends on animal • experiments • knowledge about functioning of human • prevention of becoming ill • treatment • William Harvey: principles of blood circulation • Gerard Domagk: antibiotics not effective in petri-dish, had to be • transformed to sulfonamide in living organism • Louis Pasteur: infection routes, development of vaccins

28. Debate • Debate on justification of animal experiments • 1789: Jeremy Bentham – Introduction to the principles of • Morals and Legislation • „The question is not, can they reason? nor, can they talk? • but, can they suffer?“ • results from animal experiments are misleading (Vioxx) • animal experiments lead to false negative results

29. Debate Nature (December 13th) acknowledges: “certain mouse models of cancer, for example, do not accurately mimic the disease in humans, and may even have hampered the development of some drugs (see Nature 442, 739–741; 2006).” Many eminent cancer scientists have gone much further, eg. according to Dr Irwin Bross, former Director of the world's largest cancer research institute: “While conflicting animal results have often delayed and hampered advances in the war on cancer, they have never produced a single substantial advance in either the prevention or treatment of human cancer.” Furthermore, Cancer Research UK asserts: “We do trials in people because animal models do not predict what will happen in humans.”

30. Debate Statement of the Royal Society ’s position on the Use of Animals in Research.The Royal Society, 28 January 2002 “We have all benefited immensely from scientific research involving animals.From antibiotics and insulin to blood transfusions and treatments for cancer or HIV, virtually every medical achievement in the past century has depended directly or indirectly on research on animals.The same is true for veterinary medicine.” Review of cost-benefit assessment in the use of animals in research, Animal Procedures Committee, June 2003 “An absolute position that all animal experiments are scientifically invalid is untenable.… examples of scientifically dubious or invalid animal experiments … do not add up to a general proof that animal experimentation as a whole is flawed science.”

31. Debate For example, the claim was made many times that all medical breakthroughs have come from animal research, without which medical progress would be impossible. This is a ludicrous claim, which is patently false. The Advertising Standards Authority recently ruled that the milder claim "Some of the major advances in the last century would have been impossible without animal research" is misleading and should not be repeated… (Kathy Archibald, Director, Europeans for Medical Progress, UK) The Authority considered that the information sent by the advertisers showed that animal research had played a part in the development of the listed advances. It considered, however, that the claim implied those advances could not have been achieved through non-animal research; it considered that, because the advertisers could not show what would have happened if research had been carried out differently, they could not prove that claim. It concluded that the claim was misleading; it told the advertisers not to repeat it and to amend the claim to "Some of the major advances in the last century relied on animal research ...", or similar, in future advertisements. (Advertising Standards Authority, Mid City Place, 71 High Holborn, London, WC1V 6QT, United Kingdom)

32. stellingen • Biomedisch onderzoek met dieren is overbodig • Wie geneesmiddelen gebruikt, kan niet tegen dierproeven zijn. • Mens en dier zijn biologisch zo verschillend dat je resultaten van het onderzoek aan dieren niet kunt vertalen naar de mens • Alleen vegetariërs kunnen consistent tegen dierproeven ageren • Dieren zijn aan mensen ondergeschikt,daarom mag je ze voor onderzoek gebruiken • Biologisch gezien is de mens een dier temidden van andere dieren en dus niet superieur. Dit heeft gevolgen voor de argumentatie over dierproeven. • Gewone mensen zijn niet in staat om de opzet en het belang van dierproeven goed te beoordelen, daarom moeten ze dit aan de betrokken wetenschappers overlaten. Die weten immers het beste wat zinvol onderzoek is. Wetgeving met commissies (achter gesloten deuren) zoals bijvoorbeeld in Nederland is daarom meer dan voldoende belemmering voor de wetenschap. • Voor proefdieren wordt beter en deskundiger gezorgd dan voor gezelschapsdieren