Ethics of Research involving animals
Summary and recommendations
I. Background and introduction
Issues raised by research1 involving animals have aroused intense debate, particularly in the UK. Opinion about its necessity, justification and acceptability varies widely. Discussion on the subject is often portrayed as being essentially between two positions that are either ‘for’ or ‘against’ the use of animals. This is unhelpful, since the matter itself is complex, as are the many views that surround it. A very brief overview would need to include at least the following range of positions.
One group favours the use of animals in research and emphasises the scientific and medical benefits that have arisen. Supporters of this view include most medical-research charities, many patient groups, the current UK Government and most members of the scientific community using animals. They point out that the use of animals in research has made a substantial contribution to our understanding of biological processes, and that it has been responsible for many important biomedical discoveries, including the development of a great number of therapies and preventative treatments, such as antibiotics, insulin, vaccines and organ transplantation. The development of most modern medicines has also involved animals in research and testing. Proponents, noting that in the UK animal research is strictly regulated, argue on both ethical and scientific grounds, that it must continue to alleviate suffering and to advance scientific knowledge.
Others also draw on ethical and scientific arguments but come to a different conclusion, arguing for an end to animal research. Some take absolutist positions. For example, a few campaigning organisations question the scientific validity of all animal research and want an immediate end to the practice because they believe that results from biomedical experiments on animals are not transferable to humans. Others are less focused on the scientific issues, and more concerned with the fundamental ethical question of whether it is right for humans to subject sentient animals to procedures that may cause them pain and suffering, and from which they will not benefit.
Emphasising that animals cannot consent to such procedures they take an absolutist ethical position, arguing for an end to all harmful research, regardless of the consequences for human, scientific and medical progress.
A range of further positions can be found in the debate, as many people may have sympathy for some assumptions, but reject others made by those taking the two positions described above. For example, not all animal research is undertaken to advance medical progress, and some people question whether all uses are equally necessary and justifiable. They may therefore have concerns, for example, about basic research, where the usefulness of the knowledge produced may not always be clear, or certain forms of toxicity testing, where animals may experience considerable suffering. Others argue that research involving animals is too often perceived as the only means of addressing specific research questions, or that insufficient effort is made in exhausting the potential of scientific methods that do not use animals.
In 2003, the Nuffield Council established a Working Party to examine the debate in more detail, and to clarify the complex ethical issues raised by research involving animals. In this Summary of the Report we present:
- a brief outline of the focus and structure of the Report;
- a consensus statement, which summarises the agreement of all members of the Working Party on a number of general issues (Box 1);
- our principal observations with regard to the scientific rationale for using animals in different kinds of research and testing;
- an overview of the way in which ethical issues have been considered; and
- recommendations and conclusions arising from the consensus statement, and the discussion of scientific and ethical issues.
Footnotes
1 In this Report, we generally use the term ‘research’ in a broad sense, encompassing experiments undertaken in basic and applied research, as well as for the purpose of toxicity testing. We use the term ‘testing’ to refer exclusively to toxicity testing.