The interpretation and application of the three Rs by animal ethics committee members

The Three Rs form the basis of review of animal-use protocols by Animal Ethics Committees (AECs), but little research has examined how AECs actually interpret and implement the Three Rs. This topic was explored through in-depth, open-ended interviews with 28 members of AECs at four Canadian universities. In describing protocol review, AEC members rarely mentioned the Three Rs, but most reported applying some aspects of the basic concepts. Comments identified several factors that could impede full application of the Three Rs: incomplete understanding of the Three Rs (especially Refinement), trust that researchers implement Replacement and Reduction themselves, belief by some members that granting agency review covers the Three Rs, focus on sample size rather than experimental design to achieve Reduction, focus on harm caused by procedures to the exclusion of housing and husbandry, and lack of consensus on key issues, notably on the nature and moral significance of animal pain and suffering, and on whether AECs should minimise overall harm to animals. The study suggests ways to achieve more consistent application of the Three Rs, by providing AECs with up-to-date information on the Three Rs and with access to statistical expertise, by consensus-building on divisive issues, and by training on the scope and implementation of the Three Rs.     

Vulnerable Subjects? The Case of Nonhuman Animals in Experimentation

The concept of vulnerability is deployed in bioethics to, amongst other things, identify and remedy harms to participants in research, yet although nonhuman animals in experimentation seem intuitively to be vulnerable, this concept and its attendant protections are rarely applied to research animals. I want to argue, however, that this concept is applicable to nonhuman animals and that a new taxonomy of vulnerability developed in the context of human bioethics can be applied to research animals. This taxonomy does useful explanatory work, helping to pinpoint the limitations of the 3Rs/welfare approach currently adopted in the context of animal experimentation. On this account, the 3Rs/welfare approach fails to deliver for nonhuman animals in experimentation because it effectively addresses only one element of their vulnerability (inherent) and paradoxically through the institution of Animal Ethics Committees intended to protect experimental animals in fact generates new vulnerabilities that exacerbate their already precarious situation.     

Survey of Canadian animal-based researchers' views on the Three Rs: replacement, reduction and refinement

The 'Three Rs' tenet (replacement, reduction, refinement) is a widely accepted cornerstone of Canadian and international policies on animal-based science. The Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC) initiated this web-based survey to obtain greater understanding of 'principal investigators' and 'other researchers' (i.e. graduate students, post-doctoral researchers etc.) views on the Three Rs, and to identify obstacles and opportunities for continued implementation of the Three Rs in Canada. Responses from 414 participants indicate that researchers currently do not view the goal of replacement as achievable. Researchers prefer to use enough animals to ensure quality data is obtained rather than using the minimum and potentially waste those animals if a problem occurs during the study. Many feel that they already reduce animal numbers as much as possible and have concerns that further reduction may compromise research. Most participants were ambivalent about re-use, but expressed concern that the practice could compromise experimental outcomes. In considering refinement, many researchers feel there are situations where animals should not receive pain relieving drugs because it may compromise scientific outcomes, although there was strong support for the Three Rs strategy of conducting animal welfare-related pilot studies, which were viewed as useful for both animal welfare and experimental design. Participants were not opposed to being offered "assistance" to implement the Three Rs, so long as the input is provided in a collegial manner, and from individuals who are perceived as experts. It may be useful for animal use policymakers to consider what steps are needed to make replacement a more feasible goal. In addition, initiatives that offer researchers greater practical and logistical support with Three Rs implementation may be useful. Encouragement and financial support for Three Rs initiatives may result in valuable contributions to Three Rs knowledge and improve welfare for animals used in science.     

Searching and review on the Three Rs information in Korea: time for quality assessment and continued education

Scientists planning research that involves the use of animals are required by international and/or national law to examine the possibilities for the implementation of Replacement, Reduction and/or Refinement (the Three Rs principles of Russell and Burch) in experiments for research, testing, and education. There are two Korean laws legislating humane use of animals and ethical review prior to animal experiments. This report reviews current practice of the literature search by the researchers and protocol review by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees on the Replacement, Reduction and Refinement alternatives in Korea. The promotion and protection of the laboratory animals are one of the core competencies of investigators exploring the ethical conduct of research and good science. [BMB Reports 2013; 46(7): 335-337]     

The role of organizational culture in compliance with the principles of the 3Rs

In order for their research to be legitimate, scientists carrying out research using animals must comply with rules and regulations. The 3Rs (replacement, reduction and refinement) are one set of guidelines that help to promote the ethical use of animals for research. An important question is whether implementing the principles of the 3Rs in legal regulations, such as a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes, will increase compliance with the principles of the 3Rs in research organizations. Previous work suggests that organizational culture is just as important for directing behavior as are formalized rules and regulations. This article introduces the concepts of compliance and organizational culture and discusses their consequences on the implementation of the principles of the 3Rs.     

Individual and collective responsibility to enhance regulatory compliance of the Three Rs

Investigators planning to use animals in their research and the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) members who review the research protocols must take personal responsibility for ensuring that they have the skills and knowledge to perform their duties, applying the Three Rs principles of Russell and Burch. The two Korean laws introduced in 2008 and 2009 regulating animal use for scientific purposes in line with the Three Rs principles have been revised a total of 11 times over the last 6 years. Both regulatory agencies, e.g., the Animal and Plant Quarantine Agency and the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety, provide regular training based on the legal requirements. Based on the amended Animal Welfare Act, the IACUC appointment framework has been upgraded: appointments are now for two-year terms and require a qualified training certificate issued by the Animal and Plant Quarantine Agency since 2012. The authors reviewed the current curricular programs and types of training conducted by the two governing agencies through Internet searches. Our Internet survey results suggest that: a) diversity should be provided in training curricula, based on the roles, backgrounds and needs of the individual trainees; b) proper and continued educational programs should be provided, based on trainees’ experiences; and c) active encouragement by government authorities can improve the quality of training curricula. [BMB Reports 2014; 47(4): 179-183]     

Animal Care Courses: Helping Fulfill the Mandate of Animal Care Committees in Canada

Animal Care Committees (ACCs) at Canadian universities and research centers operate under the aegis of the Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC) and its guidelines for the humane care and treatment of animals in teaching, research, and testing. All Canadian universities have at least one active committee. The committees are expected to assume an educative role beyond the provision of information concerning housing, maintenance, and appropriate conditions for the treatment of animals in research. This includes critical examination of the serious ethical issues involved in animal research within the context of the principles and practices endorsed by the CCAC. One-day animal care courses provided by ACCs at three Canadian universities are described. Comparisons are made between the content and structure of curricula and the ways these relate to the teaching and research mandate in each institution, focusing particularly on the teaching of ethics in each course. The implications for heightening awareness of ethical issues in animal research and improving the effectiveness of these courses are discussed.     

Animal care courses: helping fulfill the mandate of animal care committees in Canada

Animal Care Committees (ACCs) at Canadian universities and research centers operate under the aegis of the Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC) and its guidelines for the humane care and treatment of animals in teaching, research, and testing. All Canadian universities have at least one active committee. The committees are expected to assume an educative role beyond the provision of information concerning housing, maintenance, and appropriate conditions for the treatment of animals in research. This includes critical examination of the serious ethical issues involved in animal research within the context of the principles and practices endorsed by the CCAC. One-day animal care courses provided by ACCs at three Canadian universities are described. Comparisons are made between the content and structure of curricula and the ways these relate to the teaching and research mandate in each institution, focusing particularly on the teaching of ethics in each course. The implications for heightening awareness of ethical issues in animal research and improving the effectiveness of these courses are discussed.     

Pharmacogenetics: the bioethical problem of DNA investment banking

Concern about the ethics of clinical drug trials research on patients and healthy volunteers has been the subject of significant ethical analysis and policy development--protocols are reviewed by Research Ethics Committees and subjects are protected by informed consent procedures. More recently attention has begun to be focused on DNA banking for clinical and pharmacogenetics research. It is, however, surprising how little attention has been paid to the commercial nature of such research, or the unique issues that present when subjects are asked to consent to the storage of biological samples. Our contention is that in the context of pharmacogenetic add-on studies to clinical drug trials, the doctrine of informed consent fails to cover the broader range of social and ethical issues. Applying a sociological perspective, we foreground issues of patient/subject participation or 'work', the ambiguity of research subject altruism, and the divided loyalties facing many physicians conducting clinical research. By demonstrating the complexity of patient and physician involvement in clinical drug trials, we argue for more comprehensive ethical review and oversight that moves beyond reliance on informed consent to incorporate understandings of the social, political and cultural elements that underpin the diversity of ethical issues arising in the research context.     

Comments on the sixth report of the Animal Welfare Advisory Committee

The Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (AWAC) was established in July 1996, to consider the care, welfare and use of animals involved in procedures for defence research purposes at Defence and Evaluation Research Agency (DERA) establishments in the UK. Two of the objectives of AWAC are to examine the broad trends in animal use at DERA establishments, and to implement and audit the application of the Three Rs principle. AWAC's sixth report addressed the period from 31 October 2000 to 28 February 2002. The statistics of animal use within the report are briefly examined, and some of the actions undertaken by defence research establishments to facilitate the application of the Three Rs are highlighted. It is recommended that, if possible (subject to security constraints), figures detailing the severity of the procedures undertaken should be included in future issues of the report, in order to provide a more-detailed account. It is concluded that Defence Science and Technology Laboratory establishments have made a contribution to the Three Rs, and that other establishments may be able to incorporate some of their actions into their own research programmes. There was an overall 36% increase in the number of procedures carried out by defence research establishments between 1995 and 2000, from 8,900 to 12,065. This probably reflects alterations in the research programme, which is, in turn, decided primarily by the Ministry of Defence's customers and the progress made with previous research programmes. It is therefore recommended that the UK Government allocates significantly more financial resources for the development and validation of alternatives, in order to maximise the potential for achieving the Three Rs in defence research, and to complement the existing initiatives within the defence research industry.     

Module five: implementation of ethics review

The objective of this module is to inform you on issues of concern for Research Ethics Committee members and investigators during the review process. The many guidelines on research ethics, including those from the South African Department of Health and the World Health Organisation, will be referred to extensively to educate you on the requirements of Research Ethics Committees. The evolution of the review process in South Africa will be detailed.     

The Brazilian legal framework on the scientific use of animals

Brazil has an exceptionally dynamic research sector in Latin America in health, biotechnology, and pharmacology, backed by defined government policies on science and technology and a health research agenda focusing on important neglected diseases: malaria, leishmaniasis, Chagas disease, turberculosis, leprosy, and dengue. The Brazilian health research policy promotes partnerships and networks among scientists in academic institutions in both wealthy industrialized and disease-endemic countries, and in these efforts the government's guidelines for animal use in biomedical research are considered fundamental to guarantee both animal welfare and the quality of research. Given international discussions of animal experimentation regulations and guidelines, in this article we describe current Brazilian legislation governing the use of animals in scientific investigations. We conclude that, despite advances in the implementation of the 3Rs (reduction, refinement, replacement), the new regulatory framework does not sufficiently incorporate ethical considerations, lacking explicit reference to the 3Rs as well as measures for their full application. The more humane use of animals in research will depend on the approach adopted by Brazil's National Council for the Control of Animal Experimentation to promote the 3Rs and to improve internal regulations as well as data collection and analysis in research institutions. In Brazil as elsewhere, one of the greatest challenges to policymakers is to harmonize the myriad and intertwined legal provisions without hindering biomedical research.     

A social science view on the FRAME symposium: identities and networks

This paper, written by two social scientists, presents a social science perspective on the issues raised at the FRAME symposium on Human Alternatives to Animal Studies. Drawing upon the authors' experience of conducting research with stem cell scientists, issues around access to human tissue for in vitro uses are considered. The paper concludes by raising questions pertinent to both interested social scientists and the Three Rs agenda.     

BOOK REVIEWS

Book Reviews in this Article:
Accountability of Bioethics Committees and Consultants by Sigrid Fry Revere.
Research Ethics in Practice : The Animal Ethics Committees in Sweden,
The Beginning of Human Life edited by Fritz K. Beller and Robert F. Weir. Dordecht
Dementia und Aging: Ethics, Values, ad Policy Choices , edited by Robert H. Binstock, Stephen G. Post and Peter J. White-house.
Least Worst Death — Essays in Bioethics on the End of Life by Margaret Pabst Battin.
All God's Mistakes — Genetic Counseling in a Pediatric Hospital by Charles L. Bosk.
Informed Consent: Patient Autonomy and Physician Beneficence within Clinical Medicine by Stephen Wear.     

Animal welfare and the refinement of neuroscience research methods--a case study of Huntington's disease models

The use of animals in biomedical and other research presents an ethical dilemma: we do not want to lose scientific benefits, nor do we want to cause laboratory animals to suffer. Scientists often refer to the potential human benefits of animal models to justify their use. However, even if this is accepted, it still needs to be argued that the same benefits could not have been achieved with a mitigated impact on animal welfare. Reducing the adverse effects of scientific protocols ('refinement') is therefore crucial in animal-based research. It is especially important that researchers share knowledge on how to avoid causing unnecessary suffering. We have previously demonstrated that even in studies in which animal use leads to spontaneous death, scientists often fail to report measures to minimize animal distress (Olsson et al. 2007). In this paper, we present the full results of a case study examining reports, published in peer-reviewed journals between 2003 and 2004, of experiments employing animal models to study the neurodegenerative disorder Huntington's disease. In 51 references, experiments in which animals were expected to develop motor deficits so severe that they would have difficulty eating and drinking normally were conducted, yet only three references were made to housing adaptation to facilitate food and water intake. Experiments including end-stages of the disease were reported in 14 papers, yet of these only six referred to the euthanasia of moribund animals. If the reference in scientific publications reflects the actual application of refinement, researchers do not follow the 3Rs (replacement, reduction, refinement) principle. While in some cases, it is clear that less-than-optimal techniques were used, we recognize that scientists may apply refinement without referring to it; however, if they do not include such information in publications, it suggests they find it less relevant. Journal publishing policy could play an important role: first, in ensuring that referees seriously consider whether submitted studies were indeed carried out with the smallest achievable negative impact on the animals and, secondly, in encouraging scientists to share refinements through the inclusion of a 3Rs section in papers publishing the results of animal-based research.     

The use of non-human primates in biological and medical research: evidence submitted by FRAME to the Academy of Medical Sciences/Medical Research Council/Royal Society/Wellcome Trust Working Group

The Academy of Medical Sciences, the Medical Research Council, the Royal Society and the Wellcome Trust are undertaking a study into the use of non-human primates in biological and medical research. An independent working group of scientific experts, led by Sir David Weatherall, aims to produce a report summarising the findings of this study, early in 2006. The trends in primate research, and the nature and effects of recent and proposed changes in the global use of non-human primates in research, will be investigated. The associated ethical, welfare and regulatory issues, and the role and impact of the Three Rs principles of refinement, reduction and replacement will also be reviewed. As part of this study, a call for evidence was made. The evidence submitted by FRAME emphasised that the use of non-human primates for fundamental research or for regulatory testing still fails to take into account the fact that, although non-human primates are anatomically and physiologically similar to humans, they are not necessarily relevant models for studies on human disease or human physiology. FRAME continues to believe that we have a duty to ensure that these animals are not used without overwhelming evidence that they are the only suitable and relevant models for use in work of undeniable significance.     

A study of three IACUCs and their views of scientific merit and alternatives

Two ethical issues facing Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees [IACUCs] today are assessing scientific merit and the use of alternatives in research proposals. This study evaluated 3 IACUCs using a 19-question survey, with a 77.8% response rate. Although 76% of members answered that scientific merit should be more dili-gently assessed if more than slight pain is caused, 14% believed that assessing scien-tific merit is not the role of the IACUC. Nearly 86% agreed that the search for alterna-tives should be more diligent for protocols that incur more than slight pain to the animals involved. Some members believed that alternatives were not actively enough sought after, while others believed no viable alternatives existed. Additional guide-lines are needed to clarify these issues.     

Future activities: ECVAM and the quality control of biologicals

ECVAM's activities in the field of biologicals have contributed in many ways to the successful incorporation of Three Rs methods, as summarised elsewhere in these proceedings. The progress achieved is impressive, but large numbers of animals are still needed in order to meet the requirements stipulated by various regulations. ECVAM's activities in this area should therefore be continued and extended. Besides the well-established organisation of ECVAM workshops and contributions to conferences, further prevalidation and validation studies should be funded. In addition, studies on refinement, and training courses on validated and well-established Three Rs methods, could be initiated. There is a need for more communication and information exchange, especially between regulators and industry concerning the Three Rs. ECVAM could provide a suitable forum for such activities. An ECVAM Biologicals Task Force should be established in order to define a list of priorities.     

The ethics of animal research: a UK perspective

The Nuffield Council on Bioethics, an independent body in the United Kingdom, has published a 2005 report titled The Ethics of Research Involving Animals. The Report, produced by a Working Party that represented a wide range of views, seeks to clarify the debate that surrounds this topic and aims to help people identify and analyze the relevant scientific and ethical issues. The Working Party considered the arguments surrounding whether animal research yields useful results, and recommends that its predictability and transferability should be evaluated more fully, particularly in controversial areas. Commonly encountered ethical questions and arguments were considered in order to understand what lies behind disagreement on the moral justification of animal research. Four possible ethical positions on animal research, which represent points on a continuum, are described. Despite the range of views that exist among members of the Working Party, the Report presents a "Consensus Statement" that identifies agreement on several important issues. Building on this statement, recommendations are made for improving the quality of the debate and promoting the 3Rs (refinement, reduction, and replacement).     

Unequal protection for patient rights: The divide between university and health ethics committees

Despite recommendations from the Cartwright Report ethical review by health ethics committees has continued in New Zealand without health practitioners ever having to acknowledge their dual roles as health practitioners researching their own patients. On the other hand, universities explicitly identify doctor/research-patient relations as potentially raising conflict of role issues. This stems from the acknowledgement within the university sector itself that lecturer/research-student relations are fraught with such conflicts. Although similar unequal relationships are seen to exist between health resarchers and their patients, the patient/subjects are not afforded the levels of protection that are afforded student/subjects. In this paper we argue that the difference between universities and health research is a result of the failure of the Operational Standard Code for Ethics Committees to explicitly acknowledge the vulnerability of the patient and conflict of interests in the dual roles of health practitioner/researcher. We end the paper recommending the Ministry of Health consider the rewriting of the Operational Standard Code for Ethics Committees, in particular in the rewriting of section 26 of the Operational Standard Code for Ethics Committees. We also identify the value of comparative ethical review and suggest the New Zealand's Health Research Council's trilateral relationship with Australia's NHMRC (National Health and Medical Research Council) and Canada's CIHR (Canadian Institute of Health Research) as a useful starting point for such a process.