Minutes of the meeting held on 20 September 2004
Fri, 3 December 2004
10th meeting
NUFFIELD COUNCIL ON BIOETHICS
WORKING PARTY ON THE ETHICS OF RESEARCH INVOLVING ANIMALS
Minutes of the meeting held at the Nuffield Foundation
28 Bedford Square, London WC1B 3JS
on Monday 20 September 2004
PRESENT:
Baroness Perry of Southwark (Chair)
Professor Allan Bradley FRS
Professor Grahame Bulfield CBE
Professor Robert Combes
Professor Maggy Jennings
Professor Barry Keverne FRS
Dr Mark Matfield
Professor Ian McConnell
Dr Timothy Morris
Mr Nick Ross
Dr Lewis Smith
Ms Michelle Thew
Professor Jonathan Wolff
APOLOGIES:
Professor Kenneth Boyd, Professor Steve Brown, Dr Judy MacArthur Clark CBE, Professor Martin Raff FRS, Professor John Spencer
SECRETARIAT:
Dr Sandy Thomas, Dr Catherine Moody, Mr Harald Schmidt, Ms Caroline Rogers, Mr Mun-Keat Looi, Mrs Elaine Talaat-Abdalla
INTRODUCTION BY THE CHAIR
1 The Chair welcomed the members of the Working Party and outlined the schedule for the meeting. In the morning, comments by peer reviewers on Chapters 1-13 would be discussed. In the afternoon, the focus would be on Chapter 14.
MINUTES OF THE LAST MEETING
2 The minutes of the 9th meeting were approved.
DRAFT REPORT
Comments by peer reviewers
RIA 04 (13) and RIA 04 (14)
3 The Chair noted that the comments by peer reviewers had been of a very high quality. A significant number of proposed alterations had already been made by the Secretariat. Members then considered comments on individual chapters which required further discussion.
Chapter 1
4 There was some discussion about describing a series of events as instances of ‘cause and association’ or ‘cause and necessary effect’. Members agreed that phrasing which suggested that certain results which had been achieved by animal research could therefore, and by necessity, only have been achieved by this method, should be reviewed. The historical fact that a certain experiment had led to a certain result did not prove that this was the only possible way.
5 There was also discussion about the question of how far the Report should consider whether or not animal research had ‘delayed progress’, or which improvements might have been made without animal research’, which was suggested by some peer reviewers. It was noted that such a discussion was not straightforward and included a significant number of highly speculative and variable hypotheses. Members agreed that rather than focussing on what could have been achieved without animal research in the past, the Report should focus on the current potential of alternative methods.
Chapter 2
6 It was agreed that reference should be made to the building of new animal laboratories in Cambridge and Oxford. However, no detailed discussion should be added. The draft recommendation on strategies and guidelines to promote dialogue should be deleted. Instead it should be stated that these matters would be addressed in more detail in Chapter 14.
Chapter 3
7 It was agreed that the table on different uses of animal would not be moved to an Annex. With regard to the remaining comments on this chapter and on Chapter 13, a preliminary discussion would take place between Professor Kenneth Boyd, Professor Jonathan Wolff and the Secretariat. Further discussion by the Working Party would take place at the next meeting.
Chapter 4
8 The detailed comments by two peer reviewers should be incorporated in this chapter, also taking into account the copies of articles which had been submitted. The chapter would also be reviewed again to eliminate sections which could appear as excessively sceptical with regard to the possibility of assessing the wellbeing of animals. Professor Barry Keverne and Dr Maggy Jennings would contribute further comments for the next revision of the chapter by email.
Chapter 5
9 One peer reviewer observed that issues relating to transferability and predictability were not discussed in equal detail in all science chapters. It was agreed that the chapters would be reviewed and that the discussion of predictability and transferability in the summary of Section 2 should be expanded, including a clarification of the differences between basic and applied research. Chapter 5 should also be reviewed to determine whether it made sufficiently clear that the primary aim of basic research was the advancement of knowledge.
10 Another peer reviewer urged the Working Party not to be overconfident with regard to the value of genetic research. While some members were sympathetic to this view, others observed that that there was clear evidence for the genetic basis of many diseases, which it would be wrong to ignore. The discussion of genetic research would be reviewed again in order to identify cases where genetic research had been embraced overly enthusiastically.
Chapter 6
11 There was some discussion about comments by one peer reviewer who suggested that the examples provided in this Chapter were misleading; that issues of transferability had not been addressed; and that failures of animal research had been ignored. It was agreed how to revise the chapter and a general discussion followed of whether it would be useful to add descriptions of animal research where progress had been difficult, or cases where wrong inferences had been drawn from such research. Several possible examples were considered and new drafting in this area would be included in the next version of the Report.
Chapter 7
12 As discussed in relation to Chapter 5, the Working Party rejected the general criticism that the importance accorded to genetic studies was unjustified. However, the Chapter would be reviewed again by the Secretariat in order to identify cases where genetic research was perhaps embraced over-enthusiastically.
Chapter 8
13 One peer reviewer took the view that insufficient attention had been given in this chapter to the welfare implications of the different types of animal research described. Members agreed that the Secretariat in consultation with Dr Tim Morris, would review the chapter and consider also whether the way in which procedures were described was adequate.
Chapter 9
14 It was agreed not to separate description of the testing of medicines from the testing of household substances and bulk chemicals, because scientifically, almost identical tests were used in both settings. Members also agreed to add a box summarising the sources of uncertainties in relation to toxicity testing, and a box describing the controversies surrounding the use of the drug thalidomide.
15 There was some discussion about the issue of duplication of research which had been raised by several peer reviewers. All members agreed that the intention of urging the avoidance of unnecessary duplication was not to prevent scientifically necessary research. Rather, the paradigm case of duplication which should be avoided was where one research group undertook an experiment without the knowledge that it had already been conducted by another group. The draft would be revised accordingly, considering the need for replication, validation and confirmation of previous research.
Summary of Section 2
16 It was agreed that the Summary, which had been added by the Secretariat before sending the Report for peer review, should be included in the final Report. The chapter would be developed further in consultation with Dr Maggy Jennings, Dr Mark Matfield, Dr Tim Morris, Dr Lewis Smith and Ms Michelle Thew.
Chapter 10
17 The discussion in paragraph 10.17ff concerning ‘replacement alternatives’ and ‘displacement’/‘avoidance’ should be revised in light of the comments by one peer reviewer, emphasising that both approaches were indeed equally important. The paragraph addressing ‘regulatory inertia’ would be reviewed to ascertain whether it was sufficiently balanced. A discussion concerning the alleged delay of the ban of ascidic monoclonal antibodies by the HO would provisionally be included in Chapter 14 rather than in Chapter 10.
Chapter 11
18 The issues in relation to regulation preventing the parallel development of a new animal model by two laboratories would be addressed in the section addressing duplication of research in Chapter 14.
Chapter 12
19 Although some alterations had already been made by Secretariat in light of the peer review comments, a lack of time prevented further discussion of comments on this Chapter. Members were invited to send their comments to the Secretariat.
Chapter 13
20 The discussion of the overlapping consensus should make clear in which areas there was genuine agreement among members, and in which areas there was no agreement, but a shared view that peace and the protection of civil order demanded prohibition of specific forms of protest, such as terrorist action. It was agreed that a preliminary discussion of comments on this chapter should take place between Professor Kenneth Boyd, Professor Jonathan Wolff and the Secretariat. Further discussion by the Working Party would take place at the next meeting.
Chapter 14
21 It was proposed to begin the chapter with a more positive tone, and a number of specific revisions concerning paragraphs 14.1-14.28 were agreed. There followed a detailed discussion about the current draft of the consensus statement, and especially about the question of whether or not, and if so, under what circumstances, a world without animal research was desirable and possible. Members agreed that the Secretariat should consider the various options for an improved version of the paragraph, and re-circulate a revised draft in due course.
22 Members also discussed matters in relation to whether or not information about the level of suffering was provided in appropriate ways in the Statistics published by the Home Office. There was also further discussion about the section on terrorism and it was agreed that drafting provided by Mr Nick Ross should be added. The Chair invited members to consider more specific and targeted recommendations in these, as well as in relation to other areas, and to send drafts to the Secretariat. Paragraphs 14.39-14.48 which discussed the option of setting targets for reduction, refinement or replacement of animal research in particular areas was debated in detail, and a revised version would be included in the next draft Report.
ANY OTHER BUSINESS
23 It was agreed to hold one further meeting. The Secretariat would contact the Working Party to discuss possible dates.
Last Updated Fri, 3 December 2004