| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 1
1
Laboratory Animals and
Public Perspective
REGULATORY ISSUES
In recent years, virtually every aspect of biomedical research has been
increasingly subjected to public scrutiny. A major concern is the justifica-
tion of public funding. In addition, heightened public awareness and pres-
sure have resulted in increased oversight in such areas as the health and
safety of workers, the state of the environment, and the welfare of animals
used in research, teaching, and testing. Design and review of protocols
involving the use of animals should include consideration of applicable
regulations and public accountability in each of those areas.
Two federal laws govern the use of animals. The Health Research
Extension Act (PL 99-158), passed in 1985, amended Title 42, Section
289d, of the U.S. Code and gave the force of law to the Public Health
Service Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (PHS,
1996; hereafter called PHS Policy). PHS Policy applies to all activities
conducted or funded by the Public Health Service (PHS) that involve any
live vertebrate animal used or intended for use in research, training, or
testing. It requires compliance with the Animal Welfare Regulations (AWRs),
and it specifies minimal components of an institution's animal care and use
program, oversight responsibilities, and reporting requirements. Programs
for animal care and use must be based on the Guide for the Care and Use of
Laboratory Animals (NRC, 1996 et seq.), hereafter called the Guide; any
departure from its recommendations must be documented and justified. PHS
OCR for page 2
2
RODENTS: LABORATORY ANIMAL MANAGEMENT
Policy stresses institutional self-regulation and gives responsibility for oversight
to an institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC). The Office for
Protection from Research Risks (OPRR) is responsible for the general ad-
ministration and coordination of PHS Policy. OPRR responsibilities in-
clude reviewing and approving (or disapproving) institutional assurances,
communicating with institutions concerning implementation of PHS Policy,
investigating allegations of noncompliance by PHS-funded institutions, re-
viewing and approving (or disapproving) waivers to PHS Policy, and mak-
ing site visits to selected institutions.
Title 7, Sections 2131 et seq., of the U.S. Code, popularly called the
Animal Welfare Act and most recently amended in 1985 by PL 99-198, was
originally written in 1966 to protect pets. Its focus has since shifted to
protecting laboratory animals. In addition to requiring that the U.S. Depart-
ment of Agriculture (USDA) establish minimal standards for animal hus-
bandry, care, treatment, and transportation, the act now includes provisions
to reduce animal use by eliminating unnecessary duplication and mandates
consideration of alternatives to procedures that are likely to cause pain or
distress in live animals. The amended act applies to most warm-blooded
animals used or intended for use in research, teaching, or testing in the
United States. Like PHS Policy, it emphasizes institutional self-regulation
and gives oversight responsibility to an IACUC. Regulatory Enforcement
and Animal Care (REAC), a part of the USDA Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service, administers and enforces the regulations (9 CFR 1-3)
and carries out inspections of facilities to determine compliance. Labora-
tory mice (genus Mus) and rats (genus Rattus), which make up more than 90
percent of the animals used in research, are not covered by the AWRs and
are not subject to REAC inspection.
However, there is a movement to
include them; the decision on this issue is likely to be made in federal court.
Other regulations, policies, and guidelines address animal-care issues,
although they are not specifically directed at animal research. They include
the Good Laboratory Practice rules promulgated by the Food and Drug
Administration (21 CFR 58) and the Environmental Protection Agency (40
CFR 160 and 40 CFR 792), which provide standards for the care and hous-
ing of test animals, and Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical Labo-
ratories (Richmond and McKinney, 1993), which provides guidelines for
containment of animals and animal wastes during and resulting from animal
experimentation with pathogens.
For reviews and discussions of the various regulations and guidelines,
refer to Education and Training in the Care and Use of Laboratory Ani-
mals: A Guide for Developing Institutional Programs, Part III, Chapter 1
(NRC, 19911; Use of Laboratory Animals in Biomedical and Behavorial
Research, Chapter 5 (NRC, 19881; The Biomedical Investigator's Hand-
book for Researchers Using Animal Models, Chapter 6 (Foundation for Bio
OCR for page 3
LABORATORY ANIMALS AND PUBLIC PERSPECTIVE
3
medical Research, 1987~; and The Institutional Animal Care and Use Com-
mittee Guidebook (IA C UC Guidebook) (ARENA/OPRR, 1992~.
In addition to the regulations noted above, animal experimentation with
hazardous agents is subject to regulations that govern handling, use, and
disposal of hazardous agents, such as radioisotopes and toxic chemicals.
Likewise, protection of workers from a variety of potential workplace haz-
ards is mandated by occupational safety and health agencies at the federal
level and, in many cases, at the state level. It is the responsibility of each
investigator using animals to know and comply with relevant regulations,
guidelines, and policies (federal, state, local, and institutional).
ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
The laws, regulations, policies, and guidelines discussed above estab-
lish common standards for the humane care and use of laboratory animals.
Recent revisions have refined earlier standards and improved the well-being
of laboratory animals. Nevertheless, it is the obligation of every investiga-
tor who uses animals to ensure that the highest principles of humane care
and use are applied. These principles are summarized in the U.S. govern-
ment "Principles for the Utilization and Care of Vertebrate Animals Used in
Testing, Research, and Training" (published in NRC, 1996, pp. 116-118,
and PHS, 1996, p. 1), which was prepared by the Interagency Research
Animal Committee, a group whose main concerns are the conservation, use,
care. ~nr1 w~.lf~r~ of research animals. The orincioles address such issues as
_ ~ _, _ _
the value of the proposed work; selection of appropriate models; minimiza-
tion of pain and distress; use of sedation, analgesia, or anesthesia when
painful procedures are necessary; euthanasia of animals that might suffer
severe or chronic pain or distress; provision of appropriate housing and
veterinary care; training of personnel; and IACUC oversight of exceptions
to the principles. The principles emphasize the role of the IACUC in deter-
mining the appropriateness and value of proposed work in which animals
are likely to be subjected to unalleviated pain or discomfort. Some kinds of
research should be especially carefully reviewed and periodically re-evalu
1 "L
ated by IACUCs' including studies that involve unalleviated pain or distress
(such as those in which death is the end point) and studies that involve food
or water deprivation.
Some people and groups question the value of using animals in bio-
medical research and suggest that the knowledge gained is not sufficiently
anolicable to human disease to justify the pain, distress, and loss of life
suffered by laboratory animals. However, Nicoll and Russell (1991) point
out that animal research has contributed in an important way to 74 percent
of 386 major biomedical advances made from 1901 to 1975 and that 71
percent of the 82 Nobel prizes for physiology or medicine awarded from
OCR for page 4
4
RODENTS: LABORATORYANIMAL MANAGEMENT
1901 to 1982 were given for research that depended on studies with ani-
mals. The regular occurrence of new infectious diseases of humans and
animals-such as Legionnaire's disease, AIDS, Lyme disease, and canine
parvovirus disease and the existence of diseases that kill hundreds of thousands
of people and animals a year such as cancer, cardiovascular disease, and
stroke make research in living systems imperative if we wish to continue
to make medical progress.
Most of the public are rightly concerned with the elimination of unnec-
essary animal suffering and the protection of pets, and it is an obligation of
scientists to educate the press, the legislature, and the public about the
efforts made by the scientific community to minimize animal pain and suf-
fering, the extensive review to which animal research is subjected, and the
great benefits we and our pets derive from animal research. These benefits
include the development of antiviral vaccines (e.g., vaccines against polio-
virus, canine parvovirus, and feline leukemia virus), advances in tissue trans-
plantation (e.g., of kidneys, corneas, skin, heart, liver, and bone marrow),
and the development of new treatments for cardiovascular disease (e.g.,
open-heart surgery, valve replacement, and artery replacement). The educa-
tional process should stress that scientists and most of the public agree that
the use of animals in research is necessary, that animals should be cared for
and used as humanely as possible, and that unnecessary suffering should be
prevented. Results of such educational efforts are beginning to appear in
the form of state and federal legislation to protect animal-research facilities
and laboratories from vandalism. The educational process should continue,
and all scientists should be committed to it.
Useful discussions of the ethical issues related to animal research can
be found in Use of Laboratory Animals in Biomedical and Behavioral Re-
search (NRC, 1988~; The Biomedical Investigator's Handbook for Researchers
Using Animal Models (Foundation for Biomedical Research, 19871; Mozart,
Alexander the Great, and the Animal Rights/Liberation Philosophy (Nicoll
and Russell, 1991~; and Education and Training in the Care and Use of
Laboratory Animals: A Guide for Developing Institutional Programs, Part
III, Chapter 2 (NRC, 19911.
REFERENCES
ARENA/OPRR (Applied Research Ethics National Association and Office for Protection Strom
Research Risks). 1992. Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee Guidebook. NIH
Pub. No. 92-3415. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Available from either ARENA, 132 Boylston Street, Boston, MA 02116 or U.S. Govern-
ment Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402 (refer to stock no. 017-040-00520-2).
Foundation for Biomedical Research. 1987. The Biomedical Investigator's Handbook for
Researchers Using Animal Models. Washington, D.C.: Foundation for Biomedical Re-
search. 86 pp.
OCR for page 5
LABORATORY ANIMALS AND PUBLIC PERSPECTIVE
Nicoll, C. S., and S. M. Russell. 1991. Mozart, Alexander the Great, and the animal rights/
liberation philosophy. FASEB J. 5:2888-2892.
NRC (National Research Council), Institute of Laboratory Animal Resources Committee to
Revise the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. 1996. Guide for the Care
and Use of Laboratory Animals, 7th edition. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
NRC (National Research Council), Commission on Life Sciences and Institute of Medicine,
Committee on the Use of Laboratory Animals in Biomedical and Behavioral Research.
1988. Use of Laboratory Animals in Biomedical and Behavioral Research. Washington,
D.C.: National Academy Press. 102 pp.
NRC (National Research Council), Institute of Laboratory Animal Resources, Committee on
Educational Programs in Laboratory Animal Science. 1991. Education and Training in
the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals: A Guide for Developing Institutional Pro-
grams. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. 139 pp.
PHS (Public Health Service). 1996. Public Health Service Policy on Humane Care and Use of
Laboratory Animals. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Departmentof Health and Human Services.
16 pp. Available from the Office for Protection from Research Risks, National Institutes
of Health, 6100 Executive Boulevard, MSC 7507, Suite 3B01, Rockville, MD 20892-
7507.
Richmond, J. Y., and R. W. McKinney, eds. 1993. Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedi-
cal Laboratories, 3rd ed. HHS Pub. No. (CDC) 93-8395. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services. Available from Superintendent of Docu-
ments, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
phs policy