Ethical considerations in animal experimentation: What can we do as reviewers?

RUBILAR, TAMARA; CRESPI ABRIL, AUGUSTO CÉSAR

Montreal

Workshop; world forum: Principles of Scientific Publications; 2020

Polytechnique Montreal

Animals have been used in experiments during a very long period of time, basically, to generate knowledge of the species, itself (i.e. ecological research) or as models of other species (i.e. medical research). The number of individuals used exceeds 126 million per year, but estimations include only vertebrates. The total number of animals used in research is overwhelming and has huge ethical implications. The starting point of the ethical debate on the use of animals in research can be dated from the end of seventeenth century and was focused on the issue of accepting or avoiding animal suffering. The level of social concern regarding this matter increased and forced the research community to address this issue and to review laboratory practices. In the first half of the twentieth Century, the principle of the 3R?s (replacement, reduction and refinement) was postulated and since that time has become the major framework for ethical consideration when using animals in experiments. Although this principle was a major breakthrough in the ethical treatment of animals, it comprised just a guideline. The original intention of the principle has been to promote the replacement of ?superior? animals in experiments with ?inferior? ones. As this replacement process takes place only gradually, it is necessary to implement the reduction in the number of individuals used and in the refinement of the methods applied during experimentation whenever possible. The 3Rs principle is a cautious one as there is the possibility to implement no change at all in experimental practices based on the argument that ?it is, simply, not possible?. As a result, the successful implementation of the 3Rs principle is highly dependent on individual researcher commitment and responsibility. This responsibility is crucial in terms of two different aspects of the scientific practice. On one hand, and probably the most evident, there is our role as researchers. To act responsibly, we must make a real effort to implement the principle in our own experiments. On the other hand, and often ignored or left out of the discussion, there is our role as reviewers. In this role, and in the sake of scientific integrity, the reviewer stretches the principle to its full limit, perhaps failing to accept (at least not easily) new insights aimed at replacing the use of animals. Evenmore, the reviewer actually demands a higher number of individuals or replicates in order to reduce statistical uncertainty. In this presentation, we discuss in detail the arguments presented in this area and hope that our reflections will change research practices to move towards an ethical paradigm in which the well-being of animals is fully taken into account.