FELASA accreditation of education and training courses in laboratory animal science according to the Directive 2010/63/EU.

THE FOUR EU FUNCTIONS AND BEYOND: FELASA accredits courses that fulfil the requirements of Functions A, B, C and D as defined by EU Directive, Article 23, as well as for designated veterinarians and specialists in laboratory animal science. MODULARITY AND MOBILITY: Cohesive courses for Functions and for very specific topics are accredited, but flexibility and mobility are possible: a researcher can start his/her training with one FELASA accredited course and complete other modules with another. A course organizer will deliver a FELASA certificate relating to the successfully completed modules. ACCREDITATION PROCESS: The process consists of two major steps: (1) a review of full course documentation provided by the applicant will lead, if successful, to FELASA accreditation. The course is posted on the FELASA website as 'FELASA accredited' and the course provider can deliver FELASA certificates upon successful completion of the course; (2) successful accreditation is followed by an on-site course audit. In the case of a negative outcome of the audit, FELASA accreditation is withdrawn, the course is deleted from the list of FELASA accredited courses and FELASA certificates cannot be issued. To ensure that quality is maintained, continuation of accreditation requires regular revalidation.

Ethical Considerations in Mouse Experiments.

Mice count morally because they can be harmed. This raises a moral issue in animal experimentation. Three main ethical attitudes towards animals are reviewed here. The Kantian view denies moral value to animals because they lack reason. The second view, by Singer, considers animals as sentient creatures (i.e., able to suffer). Finally, Regan considers that animals are subjects of their own life; they are autonomous and therefore have moral rights. Singer is a reformist and allows animal experimentation under certain conditions. Regan is abolitionist, saying that animals have moral rights that cannot be negotiated. Current animal protection legislation strives to put in balance the human and animal interests to decide whether an animal experiment is morally justified or not. An ethical evaluation process is conducted based on the harm-benefit assessment of the experiment. The researcher has to implement the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction, Refinement) to minimize the harms to the animals and make sure that the outcomes are scientifically significant and that the quality of the science is high, in order to maximize benefits to humans and animals. Curr. Protoc. Mouse Biol. 1:155-167. © 2011 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.