Noncompliance with Public Health Service (PHS) policy on humane care and use of laboratory animals: an exploratory analysis.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is a major biomedical research-funding body in the United States. Approximately 40% of NIH-funded research involves experimentation on nonhuman animals (Monastersky, 2008). Institutions that conduct animal research with NIH funds must adhere to the Public Health Service (PHS) care and use standards of the Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare (OLAW, 2002a). Institutions deviating significantly from the PHS's animal care and use standards must report these incidents to the NIH's OLAW. This study is an exploratory analysis of all the significant deviations reported by animal-research facilities to OLAW during a 3-month period. The study identifies the most common issues reported and species involved. The study found that the majority of the incidents resulted in animal pain and distress and that 75% ended in animal death. This study offers preliminary recommendations to address the most common problems identified in this analysis. This study urges OLAW and other stakeholders to analyze larger, more recent samples of reported deviations to compare with these results and ultimately improve adherence to animal welfare standards.

Report of the Working Group on Animal Distress in the Laboratory.

Finding ways to minimize pain and distress in research animals is a continuing goal in the laboratory animal research field. Pain and distress, however, are not synonymous, and measures that alleviate one may not affect the other. Here, the authors provide a summary of a meeting held in February 2004 that focused on distress in laboratory animals. They discuss the difficulties associated with defining 'distress,' propose methods to aid in recognizing and alleviating distressful conditions, and provide recommendations for animal research conduct and oversight that would minimize distress experienced by laboratory animals.

A demographic analysis of primate research in the United States.

An analysis of primate research in the USA, including the number and species of non-human primates used, types of research, levels of invasiveness, housing conditions and funding, is an important step in addressing various concerns (ethical and scientific) surrounding primate research. An analysis of monkey and chimpanzee research, conducted by The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), demonstrated that the USA uses more non-human primates (including great apes) in research per year, than any other country in the world. The US government devotes approximately $575-800 million per year to primate research and care. Chimpanzees are most commonly used for hepatitis research; monkeys are most commonly used for HIV research, and other research areas include vaccine and drug testing, cognition, human pathologies/diseases, drug abuse and xenotransplantation. Legislation (including great ape research bans), media attention and proposed increased primate use also contribute to the overall picture of current and future non-human primate research in the USA and throughout the world. The HSUS proposes that cost-benefit analyses of non-human primate research in the USA be conducted to properly assess "value added" to relevant fields of research and whether the use of non-human primates is the only, or most effective, strategy for biomedical progress. Finally, The HSUS proposes a ban on the use of apes in research in the USA and worldwide.

The HSUS's Pain and Distress Initiative: overview and update.

The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) publicly launched its Pain and Distress Initiative in 2000, to encourage greater attention to the prevention and alleviation of pain and distress in research animals. The initiative's ultimate goal is the phasing out of all significant pain and distress in animal research by 2020. There have been several developments to date. A survey conducted for The HSUS revealed that Americans strongly oppose the use of animals in experiments that cause them to suffer. The HSUS has begun producing a newsletter, The Pain & Distress Report, distributed periodically to over 2000 Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees, scientists and regulators. In 2000, the US Department of Agriculture issued a proposal to upgrade the regulation and reporting of pain and distress. We have challenged the leading research institutions over their under-reporting of unrelieved pain and distress in animals. We have written a comprehensive critique of CO2 euthanasia, arguing that it causes avoidable pain and distress in animals. The National Institutes of Health has issued new guidance on CO2 euthanasia. These developments lay the groundwork for a sustained effort to eliminate animal suffering in research.