Animal Care Program: Ethics
The use of animals in research, teaching and testing is an important ethical and political issue. Much of the discussion about this issue revolves around the relative value, or ‘moral value’, of humans and animals. When the needs of animals and humans come into conflict which takes precedence? Today there exists a wide spectrum of views on this subject, ranging from those concerned with animal ‘rights’ to those who view animals only as a resource to be exploited. All of these viewpoints have contributed to the development of ethical principles of animal use. These in turn have shaped animal use regulations promulgated by the USDA and the PHS, and echoed by organizations such as AAALAC, AALAS and the AVMA.
Advances in biology that began in the 1800s have provided some of the strongest arguments for imbuing animals with an enhanced moral value. By recognizing that the nervous systems of all vertebrate animals are very similar, it is assumed that activities that will cause a human pain or distress, will likewise cause pain or distress to other animals. It is for these reasons that current animal use regulations require the use of analgesics, anesthetics and sedatives for any procedures on animals that may cause more than momentary pain or distress.
What once had been a clear physical and mental distinction between humans and animals has become much fuzzier with the understanding that evolution represents a continuum. Likewise, the assumption that there is a clear moral distinction between humans and animals also has become fuzzier, and it suggest that perhaps gradations in moral value should be applied to animals. Current legislation on animal use emphasized the idea of replacement of “higher” animals with “lower” animals, and requires environmental enrichment or human contact for intelligent, social animals such as non-human primates, or dogs and cats.
Current legislation also recognizes that there are diverse viewpoints about the moral value of animals. Thus, all live animal use in research, teaching or testing must be reviewed by a committee with diverse membership. There is also an emphasis on minimizing the overall use of animals. Proposals for animal use are reviewed based on the potential for learning new information, or for teaching skills or concepts that cannot be obtained using an alternative. There are also provisions for ensuring that animal use is performed in as humane a manner a possible, minimizing pain, distress or discomfort.
These provisions include a requirement for a veterinarian to be employed at each institution, so that the needs of the animals are looked after by someone trained in and sympathetic toward animals’ needs. In addition for the requirements for analgesic anesthetics and sedatives to be used where needed, it is also required that all personnel with animal contact be trained in appropriate handling techniques and they be skilled in any experimental procedures that will be performed.
Finally, basic husbandry requirements are specified, ensuring that an animal’s food, water and shelter are provided for in an optimal manner. Deviations from the numerous requirements are granted only if adequate justification is given that the proposed experiment is scientifically and socially important, and that any methods to alleviate or pain or distress would frustrate the experimental objectives.
For further information on the ethics for animal use in research review the following websites:
- ILAR Journal Bioethics for Animal Research
- NASA
- Scientific American article
- U.S. Government Principles for the Utilization and Care of Vertebrate Animals used in Testing, Research and Training
- Guidelines for Ethical Conduct in the Care and Use of Animals from the American Psychological Association (Provides an extensive and fairly practical series of guidelines for humane use of animals in research)
Updated February 9, 2007 by SAK