Advancing primatology through ethical and scientific perspectives on rhesus monkey (Macaca mulatta) cloning.

A critical turning point was reached in research with the recent success in cloning rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta), a major advancement in primatology. This breakthrough marks the beginning of a new age in biomedical research, ushered by improved somatic cell nuclear transfer techniques and creative trophoblast replacement strategies. The successful cloning of rhesus monkeys presents the possibility of producing genetically homogeneous models that are highly advantageous for studying complex biological processes, testing drugs, and researching diseases. However, this achievement raises important ethical questions, particularly regarding animal welfare and the broader ramifications of primate cloning. Approaching the future of primate research with balance is critical, as the scientific world stands on the brink of these revolutionary breakthroughs. This paper aims to summarise the consequences, ethical challenges and possible paths forward in primatology arising from rhesus monkey cloning.

The use and abuse of moral theories in conservation debate about killing animals.

Recent ethical debate about compassionate conservation has invoked moral theories to oppose or support traditional practices of killing animals to protect biodiversity and ecosystems. The debate has featured the mainstream moral theories of consequentialism and utilitarianism, deontology, and virtue ethics. We identify problematic applications and critique of these moral theories in conservation discussions. Problems include a lack of clarity when invoking moral theories, misunderstanding and mischaracterizing theories, and overlooking features and circumstances affecting a theory's application. A key omission in the debate is a detailed discussion of the moral significance of animals and nature. We then examine the role of moral theory as such in ethical discussion, contrasting moral theory with ethical outlooks that center, for example, forms of love and care. Our aim is to advance the ethical debate about harming animals in conservation.

Uso y abuso de las teorías morales en el debate de conservación sobre la muerte de animales Resumen El debate ético reciente sobre la conservación compasiva ha recurrido a las teorías morales para oponerse o respaldar la práctica de matar animales para proteger la biodiversidad y los ecosistemas. El debate ha expuesto las teorías morales predominantes de la deontología del consecuencialismo y el utilitarismo y la ética de las virtudes. Identificamos la aplicación problemática y la crítica de estas teorías morales en las discusiones de conservación. Los problemas incluyen la falta de claridad cuando se recurre a las teorías morales, el malentendido y caracterización errónea de las teorías y pasar por alto las características y circunstancias que afectan la aplicación de la teoría. Una omisión importante en el debate es la discusión detallada del significado moral de los animales y la naturaleza. Después analizamos el papel de la teoría moral como tal en la discusión ética, lo que contrasta la teoría moral con las perspectivas éticas que se centran, por ejemplo, en formas de amor y cariño. Nuestro objetivo es promover el debate ético sobre el daño a los animales en la conservación.

Laboratory animal ethics education improves medical students' awareness of laboratory animal ethics.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we added laboratory animal ethics education into both didactic sessions and practical sessions the general surgery laboratory course, with the didactic sessions focus on teaching the fundamental principles of laboratory animal ethics, while the practical sessions emphasize the application of these principles in laboratory classes and have assessed the changes in medical students' perception of laboratory animal ethics following medical students exposure to such education. METHODS: One hundred and eighty-nine third-year medical students from Wuhan University's Second Clinical College completed a laboratory animal ethics awareness questionnaire and a laboratory animal ethics written examination before and after laboratory animal ethics education. RESULTS: After receiving laboratory animal ethics education, the percentage of students who supported euthanasia for the execution of animals and humane treatment of laboratory animals were 95.2% and 98.8%, respectively, which did not differ from the 94.9% and 96.4% observed before the education. Moreover, there was a notable increase in the proportion of students who knew about regulations related to laboratory animals (from 39.9% to 57.1%), welfare issues (from 31.9% to 50.0%), and the 3R principle (from 30.4% to 58.9%) post-education, all statistically significant at P < 0.05. Test scores also showed improvement, with students scoring (93.02 ± 11.65) after education compared to (67.83 ± 8.08) before, a statistically significant difference. CONCLUSIONS: This research helps to provide information for the good practices of laboratory animal ethics education. After receiving laboratory animal ethics education, students are better able to treat laboratory animals in a correct animal ethical manner. Laboratory animal ethics education helps improve students' knowledge of laboratory animal ethics. Students' perception towards how the laboratory animal ethics course should be delivered may vary. Still, new courses or better organized courses on laboratory animal ethics education are required in order to provide students an in-depth understanding.

Publication reform to safeguard wildlife from researcher harm.

Despite abundant focus on responsible care of laboratory animals, we argue that inattention to the maltreatment of wildlife constitutes an ethical blind spot in contemporary animal research. We begin by reviewing significant shortcomings in legal and institutional oversight, arguing for the relatively rapid and transformational potential of editorial oversight at journals in preventing harm to vertebrates studied in the field and outside the direct supervision of institutions. Straightforward changes to animal care policies in journals, which our analysis of 206 journals suggests are either absent (34%), weak, incoherent, or neglected by researchers, could provide a practical, effective, and rapidly imposed safeguard against unnecessary suffering. The Animals in Research: Reporting On Wildlife (ARROW) guidelines we propose here, coupled with strong enforcement, could result in significant changes to how animals involved in wildlife research are treated. The research process would also benefit. Sound science requires animal subjects to be physically, physiologically, and behaviorally unharmed. Accordingly, publication of methods that contravenes animal welfare principles risks perpetuating inhumane approaches and bad science.

Refining animal research: The Animal Study Registry.

The Animal Study Registry (ASR; www.animalstudyregistry.org) was launched in January 2019 for preregistration of animal studies in order to increase transparency and reproducibility of bioscience research and to promote animal welfare. The registry is free of charge and is designed for exploratory and confirmatory studies within applied science as well as basic and preclinical research. The registration form helps scientists plan their study thoroughly by asking detailed questions concerning study design, methods, and statistics. With registration, the study automatically receives a digital object identifier (DOI) that marks it as intellectual property of the researcher. To accommodate the researchers concerns about theft of ideas, users can restrict the visibility of their registered studies for up to 5 years. The full content of the study becomes publicly accessible at the end of the embargo period. Because the platform is embedded in the infrastructure of the German Federal Government, continuity and data security are provided. By registering a study in the ASR, researchers can show their commitment to transparency and data quality to reviewers and editors, to third-party donors, and to the general public.

International primate neuroscience research regulation, public engagement and transparency opportunities.

Scientific excellence is a necessity for progress in biomedical research. As research becomes ever more international, establishing international collaborations will be key to advancing our scientific knowledge. Understanding the similarities in standards applied by different nations to animal research, and where the differences might lie, is crucial. Cultural differences and societal values will also contribute to these similarities and differences between countries and continents. Our overview is not comprehensive for all species, but rather focuses on non-human primate (NHP) research, involving New World marmosets and Old World macaques, conducted in countries where NHPs are involved in neuroimaging research. Here, an overview of the ethics and regulations is provided to help assess welfare standards amongst primate research institutions. A comparative examination of these standards was conducted to provide a basis for establishing a common set of standards for animal welfare. These criteria may serve to develop international guidelines, which can be managed by an International Animal Welfare and Use Committee (IAWUC). Internationally, scientists have a moral responsibility to ensure excellent care and welfare of their animals, which in turn, influences the quality of their research. When working with animal models, maintaining a high quality of care ("culture of care") and welfare is essential. The transparent promotion of this level of care and welfare, along with the results of the research and its impact, may reduce public concerns associated with animal experiments in neuroscience research.

Laboratory mouse housing conditions can be improved using common environmental enrichment without compromising data.

Animal welfare requires the adequate housing of animals to ensure health and well-being. The application of environmental enrichment is a way to improve the well-being of laboratory animals. However, it is important to know whether these enrichment items can be incorporated in experimental mouse husbandry without creating a divide between past and future experimental results. Previous small-scale studies have been inconsistent throughout the literature, and it is not yet completely understood whether and how enrichment might endanger comparability of results of scientific experiments. Here, we measured the effect on means and variability of 164 physiological parameters in 3 conditions: with nesting material with or without a shelter, comparing these 2 conditions to a "barren" regime without any enrichments. We studied a total of 360 mice from each of 2 mouse strains (C57BL/6NTac and DBA/2NCrl) and both sexes for each of the 3 conditions. Our study indicates that enrichment affects the mean values of some of the 164 parameters with no consistent effects on variability. However, the influence of enrichment appears negligible compared to the effects of other influencing factors. Therefore, nesting material and shelters may be used to improve animal welfare without impairment of experimental outcome or loss of comparability to previous data collected under barren housing conditions.

Rethinking 3R strategies: Digging deeper into AnimalTestInfo promotes transparency in in vivo biomedical research.

In the European Union (EU), animal welfare is seen as a matter of great importance. However, with respect to animal experimentation, European citizens feel quite uninformed. The European Directive 2010/63/EU for the protection of laboratory animals aims for greater transparency and requires that a comprehensible, nontechnical summary (NTS) of each authorised research project involving animals is published by the respective Member State. However, the NTSs remain sleeping beauties if their contents are not easily and systematically accessible. The German web-based NTS database AnimalTestInfo is a unique channel for scientists to communicate their work, and provides the opportunity for large-scale analyses of planned animal studies to inform researchers and the public. For an in-depth meta-analysis, we classified the duly completed NTSs submitted to AnimalTestInfo in 2014 and 2015 according to the International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD) system. Indexing the NTSs with ICD codes provided a fine-grained overview of the prospective uses of experimental animals. Using this approach, transparency, especially for highly controversial animal research involving, for example, nonhuman primates, is fostered, as it enables pinpointing the envisaged beneficiary down to the level of the addressed disease. Moreover, research areas with many planned projects involving animals can be specified in detail. The development of 3R (replacement, reduction, and refinement) measures in these research areas may be most efficient, as a large number of experimental animals would benefit from it. Indexing NTSs with ICD codes can support governments and funding agencies in advancing target-oriented funding of 3R research. Data drawn from NTSs can provide a basis for the development, validation, and implementation of directed 3R strategies as well as guidance for rethinking the role of animal research models.

Short communication: Herd-level analysis of antimicrobial use and mortality in veal calves: Do herds with low usage face higher mortality?

The veal calf sector fears that a too-rapid and large decrease in antimicrobial use (AMU) as demanded by European authorities would increase mortality, causing economic and welfare issues. To determine whether this concern is justified, the relationship between AMU (total and different classes) and mortality in dairy-type white veal calves, managed by 2 large veal companies, was explored. A retrospective cohort study was performed on electronically collected antimicrobial consumption and mortality data from the largest Belgian veal practice during the period 2014 to 2016. Mixed linear [mortality (%) as continuous outcome] and generalized linear mixed models with binary outcome for event and trial approach were built to identify factors associated with mortality. Data consisted of 76 production cycles from 29 farms managed by 2 veal companies (1 and 2) and covering 45,001 calves. Average AMU was 30.1 ± 10.4 defined daily doses for animals per year (± standard deviation) and was higher in veal company 2 than in veal company 1 (35.9 ± 9.3 and 22.4 ± 5.7 defined daily doses for animals per year, respectively). In contrast, mean mortality was lower in veal company 2 (2.3 ± 1.4%) than in veal company 1 (4.1 ± 1.4%). Both models showed a positive association between AMU and mortality in veal company 1 and no association in veal company 2. The final linear model identified increasing herd size and the use of third- or fourth-generation cephalosporins as risk factors for mortality and the use of long-acting macrolides as a protective factor. The final logistic model identified an increased mortality risk with increased use of third- or fourth-generation cephalosporins and sulfonamides-trimethoprim and decreased mortality when using long-acting macrolides. Based on these data, at the current levels of AMU in Belgian veal calves, an increase in mortality when reducing AMU could not be evidenced. Differences in herd size and factors other than AMU likely better explain why one veal company faces almost double the mortality of another one. Abandoning the use of long-acting macrolides might have negative consequences for mortality under the current state of the industry. The most ethical way to further reduce AMU in veal calves is likely simultaneously monitoring AMU and animal welfare parameters, starting with, but not limited to, mortality.

The human-animal relationship in dairy animals.

The present study aims to identify margins for the improvement of dairy animal welfare and production based on the quality of the human-animal relationship (HAR). The main tool proposed to improve the quality of HAR in dairy animals is training of stock-people by targeting their attitude and behaviour. Given that a good quality HAR may benefit the welfare of dairy animals and productivity, new technologies, by monitoring the handling routine on farm, may be more effective in promoting good practices. In particular, the implementation of new technologies may allow identification of specific inappropriate behaviours to be targeted at stockperson level, thus increasing the efficacy of training. However, an issue related to the introduction of new technologies in the farms, particularly in those that follow traditional farming practices, is the resistance to innovation which may be encountered.

A Belmont Report for Animals?

Human and animal research both operate within established standards. In the United States, criticism of the human research environment and recorded abuses of human research subjects served as the impetus for the establishment of the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, and the resulting Belmont Report. The Belmont Report established key ethical principles to which human research should adhere: respect for autonomy, obligations to beneficence and justice, and special protections for vulnerable individuals and populations. While current guidelines appropriately aim to protect the individual interests of human participants in research, no similar, comprehensive, and principled effort has addressed the use of (nonhuman) animals in research. Although published policies regarding animal research provide relevant regulatory guidance, the lack of a fundamental effort to explore the ethical issues and principles that should guide decisions about the potential use of animals in research has led to unclear and disparate policies. Here, we explore how the ethical principles outlined in the Belmont Report could be applied consistently to animals. We describe how concepts such as respect for autonomy and obligations to beneficence and justice could be applied to animals, as well as how animals are entitled to special protections as a result of their vulnerability.

Using animal-derived constituents in anaesthesia and surgery: the case for disclosing to patients.

BACKGROUND: Animal-derived constituents are frequently used in anaesthesia and surgery, and patients are seldom informed of this. This is problematic for a growing minority of patients who may have religious or secular concerns about their use in their care. It is not currently common practice to inform patients about the use of animal-derived constituents, yet what little empirical data does exist indicates that many patients want the opportunity to give their informed consent. DISCUSSION: First we review the nature and scale of the problem by looking at the groups who may have concerns about the use of animal-derived constituents in their care. We then summarise some of the products used in anaesthesia and surgery that can contain such constituents, such as anaesthetic drugs, surgical implants and dressings. Finally, we explore the problem of animal-derived constituents and consent using Beauchamp and Childress' four principles approach, examining issues of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence and justice. Disclosing the use of animal-derived constituents in anaesthesia and surgery is warranted under Beauchamp and Childress' four principles approach to the problem. Although there exist systemic and practical challenges to implementing this in practice, the ethical case for doing so is strong. The Montgomery ruling presents additional legal reason for disclosure because it entails that patients must be made aware of risks associated with their treatment that they attach significance to.

A framework for the ethical assessment of chimeric animal research involving human neural tissue.

BACKGROUND: Animal models of human diseases are often used in biomedical research in place of human subjects. However, results obtained by animal models may fail to hold true for humans. One way of addressing this problem is to make animal models more similar to humans by placing human tissue into animal models, rendering them chimeric. Since technical and ethical limitations make neurological disorders difficult to study in humans, chimeric models with human neural tissue could help advance our understanding of neuropathophysiology. MAIN BODY: In this article, we examine whether the introduction of human neural tissue and any consequent cognitive change is relevant to the way we ought to treat chimeras. We argue that changes in cognitive abilities are morally relevant to the extent that they increase the capacities that affect the moral status of any entity, including awareness, autonomy, and sociability. We posit that no being, regardless of species, should be treated in a way that is incommensurate with its moral status. Finally, we propose a framework that can be used to guide ethical assessment of research involving chimeras with advanced cognitive capacities. CONCLUSION: We advance this framework as a useful tool for bringing relevant considerations to the forefront for those considering the ethical merit of proposed chimeric research. In doing so, we examine concepts relevant to the question of how any entity may be treated, including moral status, dignity, and capacities.

Recent efforts to elucidate the scientific validity of animal-based drug tests by the pharmaceutical industry, pro-testing lobby groups, and animal welfare organisations.

BACKGROUND: Even after several decades of human drug development, there remains an absence of published, substantial, comprehensive data to validate the use of animals in preclinical drug testing, and to point to their predictive nature with regard to human safety/toxicity and efficacy. Two recent papers, authored by pharmaceutical industry scientists, added to the few substantive publications that exist. In this brief article, we discuss both these papers, as well as our own series of three papers on the subject, and also various views and criticisms of lobby groups that advocate the animal testing of new drugs. MAIN TEXT: We argue that there still remains no published evidence to support the current regulatory paradigm of animal testing in supporting safe entry to clinical trials. In fact, the data in these recent studies, as well as in our own studies, support the contention that tests on rodents, dogs and monkeys provide next to no evidential weight to the probability of there being a lack of human toxicity, when there is no apparent toxicity in the animals. CONCLUSION: Based on these data, and in particular on this finding, it must be concluded that animal drug tests are therefore not fit for their stated purpose. At the very least, it is now incumbent on-and we very much encourage-the pharmaceutical industry and its regulators to commission, conduct and/or facilitate further independent studies involving the use of substantial proprietary data.

Assessing Veterinary Students' Ethical Sensitivity to Farm Animal Welfare Issues.

Ethical sensitivity has been identified as one of the four necessary components of moral action, yet little has been done to assess ethical sensitivity to animal issues in animal-related professions. The aim of this study was to develop assessment tools to measure and enhance ethical sensitivity to animal issues, and determine relationships between ethical sensitivity and moral reasoning. Of a cohort of 115 third-year veterinary students from the University of Queensland, Australia, 104 students gave permission to use their responses to written ethical sensitivity and moral judgment tests, and 51 to use their video role-plays to demonstrate ethical sensitivity to current animal farming issues. Inter-rater reliability of scoring by an expert panel was moderate to substantial for the written assessment, but only slight to moderate for the video response. In the written test, students' mean scores for recognition of animals' emotions, expression of empathy and recognition of alternative actions and their impacts improved after teaching. Scores did not increase for identification of their own emotions, moral conflicts between stakeholders, and conflicts between legal, organizational and ethical responsibilities as a professional. There was no overall relationship between ethical sensitivity and moral reasoning scores. However, high scores for reasoning using universal principles were correlated with high scores for recognition of moral conflicts between stakeholders and between legal, organizational, and ethical responsibilities as a professional. Further development of these ethical sensitivity assessment tools is encouraged to enable veterinary and animal science students to raise and address animal ethics issues and alleviate moral distress.