China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
The Use of Animals in Research
Published in Rebecca A. Krimins, Learning from Disease in Pets, 2020
Using pets with spontaneously occurring diseases in research does provide some advantages over purpose-bred laboratory animals. Because of Russell and Burch’s concept of the Three Rs, most initial experiments using laboratory animals are performed on lower order organisms, such as fruit flies or mice, before progressing to higher order mammals and humans. As a result, the vast majority of drugs and therapies that perform well against a disease in laboratory animal models do not successfully translate to higher order animals or humans due to inherent differences in anatomy, physiology, or immunology (Mak, Evaniew, and Ghert 2014). Evaluating disease that is naturally occurring in the end user (the pet) presents the best possible model for evaluating potential treatments for that disease in that species. Co-morbidities, prior pathogen infection, and genetic heterogeneity, which are often discouraged in controlled experiments using laboratory animals but are almost always found in pet populations, can help find ideal therapies that have a greater chance of working across multiple animals that have a disease. Additionally, using laboratory animals for research, even for research that will ultimately end up benefiting animals, is controversial. Public perception of animal research is much more positive when the experiment being performed or treatment being evaluated directly impacts the animal on which it is being conducted.
Ethics and Regulations for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals
Published in Yuehuei H. An, Richard J. Friedman, Animal Models in Orthopaedic Research, 2020
Alison C. Smith, Richard T. Fosse, Warren K. Ramp, M. Michael Swindle
The English scientists William Russell and Rex Burch, in their 1959 publication of The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique, were the first to voice scientists’ concern for experimental animals.13 They described the principles of the three “Rs” which promoted goals for research scientists: (1) replacement of animals by use of in vitro methods or by using animals that are phylogenetically lower; (2) reduction of the number of animals required; and (3) refinement of experimental methods to reduce the ethical costs in terms of painful or stressful procedures. Some decades later, the “three Rs” have been adopted by the scientific community and have served as the definition of the current search for alternatives.
Environmental Protection
Published in Lawrence S. Chan, William C. Tang, Engineering-Medicine, 2019
Environmental protection is essential for both engineering and medicine. On one hand, some diseases and health conditions are due to the effects from our environment. On the other hand, healthcare activities generated many wastes that could negatively impact our environment, and by extension, our health. In this chapter, some major environment-related diseases are discussed. To protect our environment from negative impact resulting from our medical practices, health care professionals and environmental engineers would need to work together to counter these negative impact, by following the three “Rs”, namely “Reduce” (medical waste reduction), “Reuse” (disposable converted to reusable), and “Recycle” (recycle for repurposing when possible). Some specific suggestions are included for the purpose of stimulating future discussions.
Companion Animal Studies: Slipping Through a Research Oversight Gap
Published in The American Journal of Bioethics, 2018
Rebecca L. Walker, Jill A. Fisher
In human subject research ethics, we appeal to principles of respect for persons, beneficence, and justice. In laboratory animal studies, the three Rs (reduce, refine, replace) are key touchstones, along with an overarching principle of promoting animal welfare—when consistent with the needs of science and within the constraints introduced by the institutional setting. Underlying these different approaches to research oversight are moral status assumptions regarding human and nonhuman animals. Independently of whether appeals to moral status are a specious mechanism to differentiate the two research contexts, there are important structural differences in how the research is typically conducted: in an animal “confinement” facility where conditions are controlled and consent need not be sought, versus with human participants in society whose consent and active compliance is critical.
Human Cerebral Organoids: Implications of Ontological considerations
Published in AJOB Neuroscience, 2023
Hassan Khuram, Parker Maddox, Aria Elahi, Rahim Hirani, Ali Issani
In consideration of the ethical implications on animal research, the “Three Rs” tenet of Replacement, Reduction and Refinement is often invoked when discussing the ethics around animal research. This tenet suggests that animals should only be used when non-animal alternatives have failed and that when animals are needed, the most humane methods possible should be employed (Fenwick, Griffin, and Gauthier 2009). However, there is already growing evidence positing that organoid models might be better alternatives to study certain physiological aspects such as the human intestinal epithelium (Kim, Koo, and Knoblich 2020; Sugimoto and Sato 2021). The argument can be made that a significant proportion of animal research (up to 90%) does not go past the pre-clinical stage and leads to the suffering of millions of animals, raising questions about the justifiability of animal research (Akthar 2015). In light of this, HCOs may present an alternative to animal research that would follow the replacement principle in the “Three R’s” tenant. If HCOs have less than or even equal moral status to animals, we could use them as replacements in research. However, the authors of the target article argue that HCOs can never be human, which implies that we need to understand their moral status relative to that of animals. Despite the ontological analysis of HCOs presented by the authors, the question remains as to where more complex HCOs will stand compared to other sentient beings. Considering the potential for HCOs to be better models to advance the field of medicine, these issues need to be seriously addressed before we can determine if HCOs can serve as an alternative to animal research.
High sugar but not high fat diet consumption induces hepatic metabolic disruption and up-regulation of mitochondrial fission-associated protein Drp1 in a model of moderate obesity
Published in Archives of Physiology and Biochemistry, 2023
Jarumi Hishel Cruz Hernández, Wendy Natalia Rosado Lomán, Nancy Patricia Gómez-Crisóstomo, Erick Natividad De la Cruz-Hernández, Luz María Guzmán García, Montserrat Gómez Gómez, Nadia Arely Hernández del Ángel, Carlos Francisco Aguilar Gamas, Vania Sherel Cruz Hernández, Eduardo Martinez-Abundis
Male Wistar rats weighing 50–60 g were purchased from the Production, Care and Animal Experimentation Unit (UPCEA), Juarez Autonomous University of Tabasco. All protocols were designed: 1) following the politics of the “Institutional Committee for Research” of the Juarez Autonomous University of Tabasco, which approve the use of animals; 2) in compliance with the Mexican regulations for the use of animals in research (Norma Oficial Mexicana NOM-062-ZOO-1999, technical specifications for production, use, and care of experimental animals), and 3) following the “Three Rs”: replacement, reduction, and refinement in research with animals.