[Current regulations in the Animal Welfare Act and the significance for animal research]. / Aktuelle Regelungen im Tierschutzgesetz und Bedeutung für die tierexperimentelle Forschung.

Due to the legal implantation of the 3R principle, the number of laboratory animals decreased significantly over the past 10 years. In this article, the historical development of animal experiments over the last decade will be presented in the context of the current regulations of the Animal Welfare Act. It points out bureaucratic obstacles to the approval of animal experiments, which jeopardize Germany as a research location for both academia and industry. The article presents constructive proposals for solutions. This should be done in accordance with the DFG recommendation to ensure efficient biomedical research while maintaining the highest animal welfare standards.

Rodent tests for psychiatric drugs get a rethink.

Under pressure to ditch a controversial swim test for depression, scientists look for more precise measures.

Giant monkey facility could ease U.S. shortage.

Breeder would be the country's largest; locals and animal welfare advocates are concerned.

Light: An Extrinsic Factor Influencing Animal-based Research.

Light is an environmental factor that is extrinsic to animals themselves and that exerts a profound influence on the regulation of circadian, neurohormonal, metabolic, and neurobehavioral systems of all animals, including research animals. These widespread biologic effects of light are mediated by distinct photoreceptors-rods and cones that comprise the conventional visual system and melanopsin-containing intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells (ipRGCs) of the nonvisual system that interact with the rods and cones. The rods and cones of the visual system, along with the ipRGCs of the nonvisual system, are species distinct in terms of opsins and opsin concentrations and interact with one another to provide vision and regulate circadian rhythms of neurohormonal and neurobehavioral responses to light. Here, we review a brief history of lighting technologies, the nature of light and circadian rhythms, our present understanding of mammalian photoreception, and current industry practices and standards. We also consider the implications of light for vivarium measurement, production, and technological application and provide simple recommendations on artificial lighting for use by regulatory authorities, lighting manufacturers, designers, engineers, researchers, and research animal care staff that ensure best practices for optimizing animal health and well-being and, ultimately, improving scientific outcomes.

[Historical and philosophical issues in animal experimentation]. / Enjeux historiques et philosophiques de l'expérimentation animale.

Initial practices involving experimentation with animals can be found in ancient Greece, but animal experimentation as understood in the modern world first emerged in the Renaissance. In the 19th century, the French scientist Claude Bernard analysed the basis for animal experimentation using the Cartesian philosophical concept of animals being equivalent to machines. Yet as Claude Bernard's work on biology developed, it showed that animals, in particular the so-called sentient animals, did have forms of sensitivity and consciousness similar to humans. This led to the present-day moral concern with animal experimentation. The moral argument is expressed in philosophical terms in the Universal Declaration of Animal Rights and the law known as the "Three Rs", while the practical measures for implementation are set out in the European Directive 2010/63/EU on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes, and then as transposed and enforced in the different European Union Member States. This has led to improvements in the treatment of animals used for experimentation, and also allows scope for further improvements to be added in the future, particularly with alternative methods.

Title: Enjeux historiques et philosophiques de l'expérimentation animale. Abstract: Les ébauches de l'expérimentation animale peuvent être trouvées dans l'Antiquité, mais sa pratique moderne s'amorce à partir de la Renaissance. C'est Claude Bernard qui en analyse au XIXe siècle les bases, fondées sur le concept philosophique cartésien de l'animal-machine. Mais le développement même de la biologie bernardienne a révélé que les animaux, notamment les animaux dits « sentients ¼, disposent de processus de sensibilité et de conscience proches de ceux des êtres humains. D'où un souci moral qui se glisse, de nos jours, dans l'expérimentation animale et qui conduit à diverses améliorations du traitement des animaux d'expérience.

Quimeras humano-animales. Una revisión sistemática de los problemas éticos que plantean y sus posibles soluciones / Human-animal chimeras. A systematic review of the ethical problems they raise and their possible solutions

Las investigaciones con quimeras humano-animales han evolucionado gradualmente hasta día de hoy, en que se plantean grandes proyectos relacionados con el intento de solucionar patologías que nos ayu den a los seres humanos a paliar enfermedades. Sin embargo, se debe de tener en cuenta, que muchos de estos avances científicos llevan implícito un dilema ético importante en muchos casos, y más si se involucra a personas en dichos experimentos. En la presente revisión sistemática se buscó identificar estos problemas éticos relacionados con las quimeras, así como posibles soluciones a los mismos propuestas en la literatura, incluyendo medios técnicos para la realización de quimeras menos humanizadas. Se realizó una búsqueda bibliográfica sistemática en las bases de datos Pubmed, Embase y Medes con fecha 4 de enero de 2022. Se seleccionan los artículos que cumplían estrictamente con los objetivos seleccionados para la realización del trabajo. Un total de 21 artículos componen nuestra muestra, de los cuales se extraen problemas éticos relacionados con las quimeras, posibles soluciones y medios técnicos para evitar la obtención de quimeras demasiado humanizadas. Las cuestiones identificadas en los artículos seleccionados son problemas relacio nados con el bienestar animal, adquisición de rasgos humanos de las quimeras, preocupaciones médicas derivadas de la experimentación como pueden ser las zoonosis, el origen de las células pluripontenciales para la realización de quimeras, la creación de gametos humanos por parte de dichas quimeras, el qui merismo neurológico y el estatus moral de las quimeras. En el trabajo se aportan soluciones para estos problemas, tales como la utilización de genes suicidas en las células humanas que se activarían si estas se diferencian en células neuronales o el uso de la edición genética mediante el mecanismo CRISPR/Cas9 para incapacitar a estas células para que no se diferencien en células neuronales (AU)

Human-animal chimera research has gradually evolved to the present day, in which large projects re lated to the attempt to solve pathologies that help us human beings to alleviate diseases. However, it must be considered that many of these advances in science imply an important ethical dilemma in many cases, and even more so if we involve people in said experiments. In the present systematic review we sought to identify these ethical problems related to chimeras, as well as possible solutions to them proposed in the literature, including technical means for the realization of less humanized chimeras. A bibliographic search was carried out in the Pubmed, Embase and Medes databases on January 4th, 2022. The articles that strictly comply with the objectives selected for the completion of the work will be selected. A total of 21 articles makes up our sample, from which ethical problems related to chimeras, possible solutions and technical means to avoid obtaining too humanized chimeras will be extracted. The issues identified in the articles are problems related to animal welfare, acquisition of human traits from chimeras, medical concerns derived from experimentation such as zoonoses, the origin of pluripotential cells for chimera production, the cre ation of human gametes by said chimeras, neurological chimerism and the moral status of chimeras. This paper provides solutions for these problems, such as the use of suicide genes in human cells that would be activated if they differentiate into neuronal cells or the use of gene editing through the CRISPR/Cas9 mech anism to incapacitate these cells so that they do not differentiate into neuronal cells. The only question that remains elusive to the proposal of solutions is the one related to the potential moral status of chime ras (AU)

Suffering in silence.

Caring for research animals can take a severe mental toll. Is anyone listening?

Public consultation in the evaluation of animal research protocols.

One response to calls for increased openness in animal research is to make protocols publicly accessible, but it is unclear what type of input the public would provide if given this opportunity. In this study we invited public responses to five different research projects, using non-technical summaries intended for lay audiences. Our aim was to assess the potential for this type of public consultation in protocol review, and a secondary aim was to better understand what types of animal research people are willing to accept and why. US participants (n = 1521) were asked (via an online survey) "Do you support the use of these (insert species) for this research", and responded using a seven-point scale (1 = "No", 4 = "Neutral", and 7 = "Yes"). Participants were asked to explain the reasons for their choice; open-ended text responses were subjected to thematic analysis. Most participants (89.7%) provided clear comments, showing the potential of an online forum to elicit feedback. Four themes were prevalent in participant reasoning regarding their support for the proposed research: 1) impact on animals, 2) impact on humans, 3) scientific merit, and 4) availability of alternatives. Participant support for the proposed research varied but on average was close to neutral (mean ± SD: 4.5 ± 2.19) suggesting some ambivalence to this animal use. The protocol describing Parkinson's research (on monkeys) was least supported (3.9 ± 2.17) and the transplant research (on pigs) was most supported (4.9 ± 2.02). These results indicate that public participants are sensitive to specifics of a protocol. We conclude that an online forum can provide meaningful public input on proposed animal research, offering research institutions the opportunity for improved transparency and the chance to reduce the risk that they engage in studies that are out of step with community values.

La relevancia moral del dolor de animales de experimentación y de producción / The moral relevance of pain in experimental and production animals

RESUMEN: El aspecto emocional del dolor no solo es controvertido en aves, peces y roedores, sino también en los seres humanos autoconscientes. Cuando el dolor emocional, o la insatisfacción, es vista como un mal intrínseco, evitarla o, al menos, minimizarla es un deber moral directo. El objetivo de este artículo es mostrar que no solo los modelos animales mamíferos que se utilizan en experimentación -rata (Rattus norvegicus) y ratón (Mus musculus)- sienten dolor, como reconocen universalmente las instituciones que se ocupan del bienestar animal, sino también los peces de laboratorio (Danio rerio) y los de producción (Salmo salar), y que este hecho es moralmente relevante desde el punto de vista de todas las concepciones de la moral que suelen enfrentarse en los debates morales públicos y académicos. En consecuencia, también en el caso de los peces habría que tener en cuenta indicadores de bienestar animal.

SUMMARY: The emotional aspect of pain is not only controversial in fish and rodents, but also in self-conscious humans. When pain or dissatisfaction is seen as an intrinsic evil, avoiding it or at least minimizing it is a moral duty direct. The objective of this article is to refer to pain, stress and the most widely used indices of animal welfare both in laboratory fish (Danio rerio) and production fish (Salmo salar) as well as in rat experimental animal models (Rattus norvegicus) and mouse (Mus musculus).

Ethical considerations in animal research: the principle of 3r's

In the last century, progress in the knowledge of human diseases, their diagnosis and treatment have grown exponentially, due in large part to the introduction and use of laboratory animals. Along with this important progress, the need to provide training and guidance to the scientific community in all aspects related to the proper use of experimental animals has been indispensable. Animal research committees play a primary role in evaluating experimental research protocols, from their feasibility to the rational use of animals, but above all in seeking animal welfare. The Institutional Committee for the Care and Use of Animals (IACUC) has endeavored to share several relevant aspects in conducting research with laboratory animals. Here, we present and discuss the topics that we consider of utmost importance to take in the account during the design of any experimental research protocol, so we invite researchers, technicians, and undergraduate and graduate students to dive into the fascinating subject of proper animal care and use for experimentation. The main intention of these contributions is to sensitize users of laboratory animals for the proper and rational use of them in experimental research, as well as to disseminate the permitted and unpermitted procedures in laboratory animals. In the first part, the significance of experimental research, the main functions of IACUC, and the principle of the three R's (replacement, reduction, and refinement) are addressed.

Preclinical screening for antidepressant activity - shifting focus away from the Forced Swim Test to the use of translational biomarkers.

Depression is the world's predominant mental health problem and a leading cause of disability. Neuropharmacological research has not yet advanced treatments to sufficiently meet clinical need, largely due to the failure of animal models to predict clinical efficacy. The forced swim test (FST) has been extensively used in the field of antidepressant research but has been under scrutiny due to its perceived severity to animals. Any use of animals in experiments and testing must have a scientific or regulatory purpose and researchers need to ensure that there is no scientifically valid alternative. However, regulatory requirements have been incorrectly cited as a reason to support the use of the FST. More research is required on tests that do not involve stressing animals as replacements for the FST. Non-behavioural neurochemical measures might provide a means to advance neuropharmacological developments while reducing animal suffering. For example, brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) may be promising.

Animal research unbound: The messiness of the moral and the ethnographer's dilemma.

Interspecies intimacy defines an inescapable reality of lab animal research. This essay is an effort to disentangle this reality's consequences-both in and outside the lab-as framed by the quandaries of ethnographic engagement. Encounters with lab staff and, in turn, with audiences unfamiliar with laboratory life, together provide crucial entry points for considering how the "messiness of the moral" might facilitate an "unbounded" approach to lab animal worlds. Within the lab, one encounters specialized ethical principles-often codified as law-that delimit strict boundaries of in/appropriate human thought and action. Such principles determine quotidian practices of welfare and care that, in peculiar ways, privilege animal health (as key to reliable data) while obscuring, erasing, or denying human forms of self care. As such, they presuppose a regulatory ability to formulate, shape, and (re)direct human action. Yet attentiveness to the "messiness of the moral" of lab work exposes other realities: indeed, lab personnel regularly engage in a host of subversive responses that test or cross the boundaries of mandated behavior that (re)invigorate the meaning of moral acts of care as interspecies responsibility. The ethnographer's ability to witness, record, and write about these actions within the lab rests comfortably on the relativist principle of suspended judgment. Once one moves outside the lab, however, I ask, wherein lies ethnographic responsibility, when one's accounts of the moral messiness of quotidian lab practices become unbounded and go public? I argue that a dialectical inter- and intraspecies framework-inspired by the existential anthropologist Michael Jackson-offers the ethnographer (and still other scholars) possibilities for forging a productively "unbounded" methodological analytic in and beyond domains of animal science.

Public perception of laboratory animal testing: Historical, philosophical, and ethical view.

The use of laboratory animals in biomedical research is a matter of intense public debate. Recent statistics indicates that about half of the western population, sensitive to this discussion, would be in favor of animal testing while the other half would oppose it. Here, outlining scientific, historical, ethical, and philosophical aspects, we provide an integrated view explaining the reasons why biomedical research can hardly abandon laboratory animal testing. In this paper, we retrace the historical moments that mark the relationship between humans and other animal species. Then starting from Darwin's position on animal experimentation, we outline the steps that over time allowed the introduction of laws and rules that regulate animals' use in biomedical research. In our analysis, we present the perspectives of various authors, with the aim of delineating a theoretical framework within which to insert the ethical debate on laboratory animals research. Through the analysis of fundamental philosophical concepts and some practical examples, we propose a view according to which laboratory animals experimentation become ethically acceptable as far as it is guided by the goal of improving humans and other animal species (i.e., pets) life. Among the elements analyzed, there is the concept of responsibility that only active moral subjects (humans) have towards themselves and towards passive moral subjects (other animal species). We delineate the principle of cruelty that is useful to understand why research in laboratory animals should not be assimilated to a cruel act. Moreover, we touch upon the concepts of necessity and "good cause" to underline that, if biomedical research would have the possibility to avoid using animals, it would surely do that. To provide an example of the negative consequences occurring from not allowing laboratory animal research, we analyze the recent experience of Covid-19 epidemic. Finally, recalling the principle of "heuristics and biases" by Kahneman, we discuss why scientists should reconsider the way they are conveying information about their research to the general public.

Posturas y presuposiciones éticas en el debate por el uso de animales no humanos en investigación científica / Ethical positions and presuppositions in the debate about the use of non-human animals in scientific research

Este artículo tiene el objetivo de analizar los problemas morales del uso de animales no humanos en investigación científica. Para esto se examinan cuatro posturas representativas al interior de este debate: 1) irrestricta, 2) equilibrada, 3) dilemática y 4) abolicionista, las cuales surgen de los compromisos que se toman respecto a ciertas premisas clave con las cuales se está de acuerdo o no. Dichas premisas se refieren a la importancia que le da cada postura a i) la afectación de intereses en animales, ii) la relevancia moral de estos intereses, iii) la justificación por beneficios de la experimentación animal y iv) la importancia del interés humano comparado con el de los otros animales. Cada postura acepta y rechaza un patrón particular de estos puntos, y al hacer explícitos estos compromisos podemos analizar los problemas y contradicciones que posee cada una. Al final se encuentra que las tres primeras posturas contienen incongruencias importantes respecto a la diferencia de tratos que permiten entre humanos y los animales sujetos a experimentación, además de que deben de aceptar en diferente grado el excepcionalismo humano y el especismo para explicarse. Mientras que la postura abolicionista -pese a tener más dificultades prácticas- es más consistente, a la vez que protege a animales humanos y no humanos de ser dañados por estas prácticas (AU)

This paper aims to analyze the moral problems of the use of non-human animals in scientific research. To this end, four representative positions are examined within this debate: 1) unrestricted, 2) balanced, 3) moral dilemma, and 4) abolitionist, which arise from compromises made with respect to certain key premises with which one may or may not agree. These premises refer to the importance given by each position to i) the affectation of animal interests, ii) the moral relevance of these interests, iii) the justification by benefits of animal experimentation, and iv) the importance of human interest compared to that of other animals. Each position accepts and rejects a particular pattern of these points, and making these commitments explicit, we can analyze the problems and contradictions that each position has. In the end we find that the first three positions contain important incongruities regarding the difference of treatment they allow between humans and animals subject to experimentation, besides that they must accept in different degrees human exceptionalism and speciesism to explain themselves. While the abolitionist position-despite having more practical difficulties-is more consistent, it protects human and non-human animals from being harmed by these practices (AU)

Aquest article té l'objectiu d'analitzar els problemes morals de l'ús d'animals no humans en recerca científica. Per a això s'examinen quatre postures representatives a l'interior d'aquest debat: 1) irrestricta, 2) equilibrada, 3) dilemàtica i 4) abolicionista, les quals sorgeixen dels compromisos que es prenen respecte a certes premisses clau amb les quals s'està d'acord o no. Aquestes premisses es refereixen a la importància que li dóna cada postura a i) l'afectació d'interessos en animals, ii) la rellevància moral d'aquests interessos, iii) la justificació per beneficis de l'experimentació animal i iv) la importància de l'interès humà comparat amb el dels altres animals. Cada postura accepta i rebutja un patró particular d'aquests punts, i en fer explícits aquests compromisos podem analitzar els problemes i contradiccions que posseeix cadascuna. Al final es troba que les tres primeres postures contenen incongruències importants respecte a la diferència de tractes que permeten entre humans i els animals subjectes a experimentació, a més de que han d'acceptar en diferent grau l'excepcionalisme humà i l'especisme per a explicar-se. Mentre que la postura abolicionista -malgrat tenir més dificultats pràctiques- és més consistent, alhora que protegeix a animals humans i no humans de ser danyats per aquestes pràctiques (AU)

Teaching a culture of care: why it matters / Enseñar una cultura del cuidado: por qué es importante

The use of animal in biomedical research remains a critical compromise. Research and higher education institutions play a major role in educating on the use of animal and such training is expected to translate into the development of a culture of care practice across all staff working with animals. But nurturing a "culture of care" and impacting in professional attitudes in the field of animal research remains challenging due to its social, ethical and different institutional frameworks. From an educational perspective, current practice remains challenged by the need for better integration of inter-cultural perceptions on animal welfare, supported by more cross disciplinary integration in educational curriculum including the relevance of the 3Rs principles and promoting reflective practice strategies. Institutional support is crucial to provide a safe, and supportive framework to promote such caring ethos. Our aim is to discuss practical actions to implement and assess culture of care, highlighting its direct impact on the professional integrity of staff which is directly linked to research and education excellence. Seeking a global welfare for all the beings involved and supporting individual and team reflective practice will provide better tools to guarantee the best care of the animals (AU)

El uso de animales en la investigación biomédica sigue siendo un compromiso crítico. Las instituciones de investigación y educación superior desempeñan un papel importante en la enseñanza sobre el uso de animales y se espera que dicha capacitación se traduzca en el desarrollo de una cultura de prácticas de cuidado en todo el personal que trabaja con animales. Pero fomentar una "cultura del cuidado" e impactar en las actitudes profesionales en el campo de la investigación animal sigue siendo un desafío debido a las diferentes perspectivas sociales, éticas y regulatorias. Desde una perspectiva educativa, la práctica actual sigue siendo cuestionada por la necesidad de una mejor integración de las percepciones interculturales sobre el bienestar animal, respaldada por una mayor integración interdisciplinaria en el plan de estudios, incluida la relevancia de los principios de las 3R y la promoción de estrategias de práctica reflexiva. El apoyo institucional es crucial para proporcionar un marco seguro y de apoyo para promover este espíritu solidario. Nuestro objetivo es discutir acciones prácticas para implementar y evaluar la cultura de la atención, destacando su impacto directo en la integridad profesional del personal que está directamente relacionado con la excelencia en investigación y educación. Buscar un bienestar global para todos los seres involucrados y apoyar la práctica reflexiva individual y de equipo proporcionará mejores herramientas para garantizar el mejor cuidado de los animales (AU)

L'ús d'animals en la recerca biomèdica continua sent un compromís crític. Les institucions de recerca i educació superior exerceixen un paper important en l'ensenyament sobre l'ús d'animals i s'espera que aquesta capacitació es tradueixi en el desenvolupament d'una cultura de pràctiques de cura en tot el personal que treballa amb animals. Però fomentar una "cultura de la cura" i impactar en les actituds professionals en el camp de la recerca animal continua sent un desafiament degut a les diferents perspectives socials, ètiques i reguladores. Des d'una perspectiva educativa, la pràctica actual continua sent qüestionada per la necessitat d'una millor integració de les percepcions interculturals sobre el benestar animal, recolzada per una major integració interdisciplinària en el pla d'estudis, inclosa la rellevància dels principis de les 3R i la promoció d'estratègies de pràctica reflexiva. El suport institucional és crucial per a proporcionar un marc segur i de suport per a promoure aquest esperit solidari. El nostre objectiu és discutir accions pràctiques per a implementar i avaluar la cultura de l'atenció, destacant el seu impacte directe en la integritat professional del personal que està directament relacionat amb l'excel·lència en recerca i educació. Buscar un benestar global per a tots els éssers involucrats i donar suport a la pràctica reflexiva individual i d'equip proporcionarà millors eines per a garantir la millor cura dels animals (AU)

El sesgo de publicación y la no reproducibilidad en el balance ético de los proyectos de investigación con animales / Publication bias and non-reproducibility in the ethical balance of animal research projects

La normativa que rige la investigación con animales establece la aprobación de proyectos de investigación tras haber sido sometidos a una valoración ética costes-beneficios apropiada. El sesgo de publicación y la falta de reproducibilidad en la investigación animal socavan el adecuado balance ético de los proyectos. Es necesario promover medidas que impliquen a todos los participantes (científicos, grupos editoriales, organismos gubernamentales y financiadores) y que generen un cambio en la cultura científica que revalorice los resultados negativos como parte del conocimiento científico general e incremente la calidad de las publicaciones (AU)

Regulations governing animal research establish approval of research projects after having undergone a proper ethical harm-benefit assessment. Publication bias and lack of reproducibility in animal research undermine the proper ethical balance of projects. It is necessary to promote measures involving all participants (scientists, editorial groups, governmental and funder's agencies) to generate changes in the scientific culture in order to revalue negative results as part of general scientific knowledge and to increase quality of reports (AU)

La normativa que regeix la recerca amb animals estableix l'aprovació de projectes de recerca després d'haver estat sotmesos a una valoració ètica de costos-beneficis apropiada. El biaix de publicació i la falta de reproducibilitat en la recerca animal soscaven l'adequat balanç ètic dels projectes. És necessari promoure mesures que impliquin a tots els participants (científics, grups editorials, organismes governamentals i finançadors) i que generin un canvi en la cultura científica que revalori els resultats negatius com a part del coneixement científic general i incrementi la qualitat de les publicacions (AU)

¿Existen alternativas a los experimentos con animales? / Are there alternatives to animal experimentation?

Desde hace muchos siglos el ser humano ha venido utilizando los animales para el conocimiento científico y gracias a estos animales se ha avanzado mucho en el desarrollo de terapias, cirugías, etc. Pero actualmente se sabe que no todos los ensayos que se realizan con animales acaban dando lugar a nuevos tratamientos de interés clínico. A pesar de que algunas estadísticas apuntan a una disminución del número de animales utilizados en investigación, la realidad es que todavía se continúan utilizando muchos animales e incluso está aumentado el uso de animales genéticamente modificados. Cuando un investigador se plantea un proyecto en el que se utilicen animales debe buscar alternativas que los reemplacen, reducir el número utilizado y refinar las técnicas para disminuir el sufrimiento animal. En la práctica, muchos investigadores no realizan una búsqueda concienzuda y lo justifican diciendo que no existen alternativas a sus experimentos y que es necesario el uso de animales. En este artículo se presenta cómo realizar esta búsqueda y ejemplos de métodos alternativos de reemplazo, para que no haya excusas a cambiar las metodologías empleadas (AU)

For many centuries, humanity has been using animals for scientific knowledge and thanks to these animals much progress has been made in the development of therapies, surgery, etc. But it is known that not all trials carried out on animals end up leading to new treatments of clinical interest. Despite this, many laboratory animals continue to be used, although some statistics point to a decrease in the number of animals. Moreover, there is an increase in the use of genetically modified animals. When a researcher considers a project in which animals are used, they should look for alternatives that replace animals, reduce the number used and refine techniques to reduce animal suffering. In practice, many researchers do not conduct a thorough search and justify it by saying that there are no alternatives to their experiments and animals are necessary. This article presents how to perform this search and examples of alternatives of replacement, so that there are no excuses to change the methodologies used (AU)

Des de fa molts segles l'esser humà ha vingut utilitzant els animals per al coneixement científic i gràcies a aquests animals s'ha avançat molt en el desenvolupament de teràpies, cirurgia, etc. Però se sap que no tots els assajos que es realitzen amb animals acaben donant lloc a nous tractaments d'interès clínic. Tot i que algunes estadístiques apunten a una disminució del nombre d'animals en experimentació, la realitat es que encara es continuen utilitzant molts animals i inclús esta augmentant l'ús d'animals genèticament modificats. Quan un investigador es planteja un projecte en el qual s'utilitzin animals ha de buscar alternatives que els reemplacin, reduir el número utilitzat i refinar les tècniques per a disminuir el sofriment animal. A la pràctica, molts investigadors no realitzen una cerca conscienciosa i ho justifiquen dient que no existeixen alternatives als seus experiments i que és necessari l'ús d'animals. En aquest article es presenta com realitzar aquesta cerca i exemples de mètodes alternatius de reemplaçament, perquè no hi hagi excuses a canviar les metodologies emprades (AU)