According to the federal government, mice, rats and birds are not animals.
Ninty-five percent of all creatures used in laboratory experiments are not legally considered "animals" and are excluded from regulations on care and treatment.
But pressure from animal rights activists and a lawsuit from the Alternatives Research and Development Foundation (ARDF) prompted the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) to write a rule that would expand the definition of "animal" to include these creatures most commonly used in scientific research.
The rule would require researchers to carefully monitor animal reproduction and any stress and pain to which the creatures may be subjected. Although the plan temporarily is stalled in Congress, it has once again raised questions about the role of ethics in medical research.
|
"It's amazing that someone at the USDA finally passed Biology 101 and realized that mice, rats and birds are animals," said Lisa Lange, director of policy and communications at People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA).
USDA regulations would help the animals' situation, she said. Scientists, however, predict new regulations pulling millions of dollars and countless hours away from research. Researchers say they would have to divert time from searching for cures and spend it on tedious record keeping.
Sanford Feldman, veterinarian in charge of animal care at the University, said if these regulations come into effect, "What used to be a two-day inspection will turn into a two-week one." Because of the new definition, USDA inspectors would have to examine every cage of the University's 35,000 laboratory animals, most of which are mice.
"The animals won't be any better off, because we take good care of them as it is," Feldman said.
While there are no federal laws mandating ethical treatment of laboratory animals, many scientists already follow National Institutes of Health regulations, especially if they receive funding from the NIH. Some research centers also follow regulations of their own.
Animal rights activists say this is not enough. Lange emphasized that if passed, the USDA regulations would be the law, whereas the NIH guidelines are only recommendations. Scientists currently have no laws telling them how to take care of their animals.
"For any person who is following existing recommendations, this ruling should not bother him at all. Keeping track of the animals they're testing on should be the easiest thing they [the scientists] do," Lange said.
Kobby Hoffman, research administrator and overseer of the vivarium, where the University's experimental animals are housed, explained that the University has the highest standards of animal care. If it didn't, sponsors such as NIH would not be as willing to fund research. The University Animal Care and Use Committee, in compliance with NIH guidelines, requires training for everyone involved in animal care.
For every experiment, researchers must justify the need for the use of animals, the number used and any type of stress they may experience.
Even so, Feldman said that without strict NIH guidelines, University researchers would have to take care of their animals in order to get accurate results. He said researchers would not neglect a $65,000 genetically engineered mouse.
And researchers do not enjoy experimenting on animals, said Marcia McDuffie, associate professor of microbiology and internal medicine, who has been working with experimental animals for 30 years.
"We don't like the fact that animals are getting sick any more than the fact that humans are getting sick," McDuffie said. "Those of us who [use animals] do it because we don't have any alternative."
McDuffie, who studies genes that may be responsible for autoimmune disorders, added that when she sees patients afflicted by these disorders, she feels justified in using animals to help humans.
Animal rights activist Lange, however, remains sympathetic to the animals.
"It's unscientific to claim that because an animal is smaller that it lacks the capacity to feel the same thing that you and I do," she said.
In addition to increased time spent on paperwork and inspections, having to categorize pain and stress could complicate matters more since animals cannot communicate pain as humans do.
Because of that, Hoffman says a large number of regulations are already in place. She said people realize the responsibility of minimizing pain and only using animals for testing when needed.
As of last Friday, however, it appears that the regulations proposed by the USDA settlement may not become a reality after all because of the intervention of U.S. Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.).
Cochran led a House/Senate Conference Committee in adding an amendment to the agricultural appropriations bill, which prevents the USDA from changing the definition of "animal" and imposing the proposed regulations on research institutions.
This intervention will perhaps give the dispute between the USDA and ARDF time to cool off so that a fair solution can be developed. McDuffie considers this congressional action "a statement of support of the research community" by recognizing researchers' efforts to give experimental animals the best care possible.
But if new regulations and restrictions, which McDuffie says have significantly expanded over the past decade, become unnecessarily burdensome to researchers, helping humans could become increasingly difficult. For now, the question remains: Are we more concerned about the comfort of the animal or the human?
Read More
Advancement Committee reports Honor the Future campaign milestone
By Nicolas Biernacki | 6 hours agoThe Honor the Future campaign was launched in 2019 with the pillars of sustaining education, securing democracy and driving research, and will officially end June 30.
Health System Board discusses two recent $25 million donations
By Nina Broderick | 2 days agoThe Board also discussed the goals and vision of the Paul and Diane Manning Institute of Biotechnology and voted to approve the fiscal year 2026 operating budget.
Honor Committee discusses fall Support Officer recruitment
By Bertie Azqueta | 2 days agoThe Support Officer pool is chosen by existing Senior Support Officers and the Selection and Recruitment Committee members through an application and interview process.
