[History and movements of alternatives to animal experiments in Japan].

Experimental animals have been used so very often on science studies from the late 19th centuries. Especially since Wistar rat was produced in the 1890s as an experimental animal, various kinds of experimental animals have been developed and made enormous contribution to human beings. It is not an exaggeration to say that experimental animals have made us alive and rich, so to speak. However, the number of uses of experimental animals has decreased since its peak in 1990s. One of the reasons is the existence of Alternatives to animal experiments. Around 1980, Importance of 3Rs has been increased among its support, and the trend of animal experiments has moved to ones without using animals all over the world. It is because animal experiments cost and take time, but the biggest reason is the concern towards overuse of experimental animals. There is a rooting ethical doubt among many researchers that we can sacrifice other animals to save human lives. Human beings have hunted, and domesticated other animals as means of surviving. But today, we are trying to find a way to live not only for ourselves but for other animals on the whole earth. As a mean of the living, Alternatives to animal experiments have significant meanings and it will get even more important in the future. In this article, I would like to briefly explain the history and movements on Alternatives to animal experiments that took place here in Japan.

[Reading Spallanzani today]. / Leyendo a Spallanzani hoy en día.

We remember Lazaro Spallanzani (1729-1799) mainly for his controversy with Needham over spontaneous generation, but he was a man of multiple scientific activities in the fields of biology, mineralogy, physics, mathematics and… volcanology! Called "the biologist of biologists", he developed a series of investigations about reproduction of amphibian, in one of them -Experiences in service to the history of the generation of animals and plants- we have found horrific experiments with frogs, including severe and useless mutilation of males, in order to interrupt its copulation with females, acts he describes as "barbaric", and we estimate inadmissible in the ecclesiastic man he was, even in an epoch in which animals were considered "anima vili" (something without value). A brief review of the use of animals in laboratories shows significant advances in the ethical regulations for this practice, but we believe that these achievements are not enough.

Leyendo a Spallanzani hoy en día / Reading Spallanzani today

Resumen Recordamos al abate Lázaro Spallanzani (1729-1799) fundamentalmente por su victoriosa contienda con Needham sobre la generación espontánea, pero fue un hombre de múltiples intereses en distintos campos de la ciencia, desde la biología a la volcanología. Se lo llamó el "biólogo de los biólogos", desarrollando una serie de investigaciones sobre la reproducción de los anfibios, en una de las cuales - "Experiencias al servicio de la historia de la generación de animales y plantas" - el lector moderno se estremece de horror ante las crueles mutilaciones que infligiera a los sapos machos tratando de interrumpir su copulación con las hembras. Él mismo las califica de "bárbaras" estas torturas, inadmisibles en un hombre que detentaba una jerarquía eclesiástica, aún en una época como la suya, en que se calificaba a los animales como "anima vili" (cosa sin valor). Mucho se ha avanzado hoy en día en resguardo de nuestros "hermanos menores", como los llamara San Francisco, pero aún falta mucho que hacer en la regulación de la experimentación científica que los utiliza.

Abstract We remember Lazaro Spallanzani (1729-1799) mainly for his controversy with Needham over spontaneous generation, but he was a man of multiple scientific activities in the fields of biology, mineralogy, physics, mathematics and… volcanology! Called "the biologist of biologists", he developed a series of investigations about reproduction of amphibian, in one of them -Experiences in service to the history of the generation of animals and plants- we have found horrific experiments with frogs, including severe and useless mutilation of males, in order to interrupt its copulation with females, acts he describes as "barbaric", and we estimate inadmissible in the ecclesiastic man he was, even in an epoch in which animals were considered "anima vili" (something without value). A brief review of the use of animals in laboratories shows significant advances in the ethical regulations for this practice, but we believe that these achievements are not enough.

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.

Assignment of culpability to animals as a form of abuse: Historical and cultural perspectives.

How the law regards animals reflects cultural trends that have varied widely from antiquity to the present. This article argues that cultural views of animals have shaped laws, attitudes, and practices worldwide. Whereas ancient (biblical and Mesopotamian) practices turned on economics, medieval concepts of animal culpability aligned with Christian beliefs of the primacy of humans. In medieval Europe, pets, farm animals, vermin, and insects could be held accountable for damage to persons and property. Considered entitled to due process, they were represented, tried, and punished - sometimes in public executions. Centuries of regarding animals as property subordinated to humans gave way to animal cruelty laws. It was not until the 19th century that respect for animal welfare, apart from economics, assumed legal significance. Presently, animals are not considered capable of criminal intent but can be "executed" for dangerousness. However, they may possess legal standing as civil complainants in animal rights cases. Contemporary trends include animal rights activism and courts conferring legal personhood to animals. The discussion concludes that there will be disparate approaches worldwide, based on prevailing views of animal sentience, spiritually based concepts and values, litigation arguing property and environmental law, and economics.

[Animal ethics in the 19th century and Swiss animal protection law]. / Tierethik im 19. Jahrhundert und schweizerisches Tierschutzrecht.

INTRODUCTION: The development of animal ethics and animal rights from the antiquity up to modern times is described. The relationship of humans to animals was primarily based on fear and animal cult, developed by the domestication to a partnership. The philosophers of the early modern age denied the animals the reason, what was disadvantageous to the position of the animals in the society and the behavior of humans to the animals. By the end of the 19th century the animal protection concept developed with numerous postulates for legal regulations. With the Swiss animal protection law, which came into force in 1981, most of the postulates could be realised. It is shown, how animal protection has developed since that time.

A 100-Year Review: Animal welfare in the Journal of Dairy Science-The first 100 years.

This paper outlines the history and development of research in the area of animal welfare as reflected in the 100 yr that the Journal of Dairy Science has been published. The first paper using the term "animal welfare" was published in 1983; since then (to May 2017), 244 papers that reflect growing interest regarding how farm animals are cared for have been published. Much of the scientific work to date has focused on issues related to cow health, such as lameness, and methodologically many papers use behavioral measures. In addition to this science-based research, the journal has taken on the role of publishing work of social scientists that addresses the role of the human factors relating to animal welfare, including research on citizen, consumer, and farmer attitudes toward welfare issues. We call for further research focused on societal perspectives and for new biological research focused on developing issues, such as cow-calf separation and pasture access.

David Ferrier's Experimental Localization of Cerebral Functions and the Anti-Vivisection Debate.

While representing one of the most important developments in the knowledge of the brain, both for its theoretical advances and its medical consequences, the work of David Ferrier met with strong criticism from conservative circles in Victorian society. At the end of 19th century certain British neurologists and neurosurgeons ­ including Ferrier ­ faced vehement public attacks by those aristocrats who, under the banner of antivivisectionism and "natural theology", expressed their fears of the reorganization of medicine into a scientific discipline. The debate that developed in Victorian society after these events led not only to the diffusion of Ferrier's ideas and public recognition of the advanced neurosurgical practices that stemmed from his work, but also contributed to the affirmation of the medical community in the scientific world of the time.

Animals Used in Research and Education, 1966-2016: Evolving Attitudes, Policies, and Relationships.

Since the inception of the Association of American Veterinary Medical Colleges (AAVMC), the use of animals in research and education has been a central element of the programs of member institutions. As veterinary education and research programs have evolved over the past 50 years, so too have societal views and regulatory policies. AAVMC member institutions have continually responded to these events by exchanging best practices in training their students in the framework of comparative medicine and the needs of society. Animals provide students and faculty with the tools to learn the fundamental knowledge and skills of veterinary medicine and scientific discovery. The study of animal models has contributed extensively to medicine, veterinary medicine, and basic sciences as these disciplines seek to understand life processes. Changing societal views over the past 50 years have provided active examination and continued refinement of the use of animals in veterinary medical education and research. The future use of animals to educate and train veterinarians will likely continue to evolve as technological advances are applied to experimental design and educational systems. Natural animal models of both human and animal health will undoubtedly continue to serve a significant role in the education of veterinarians and in the development of new treatments of animal and human disease. As it looks to the future, the AAVMC as an organization will need to continue to support and promote best practices in the humane care and appropriate use of animals in both education and research.

The ethical challenges of animal research.

In 1966, Henry K. Beecher published an article entitled "Ethics and Clinical Research" in the New England Journal of Medicine, which cited examples of ethically problematic human research. His influential paper drew attention to common moral problems such as inadequate attention to informed consent, risks, and efforts to provide ethical justification. Beecher's paper provoked significant advancements in human research policies and practices. In this paper, we use an approach modeled after Beecher's 1966 paper to show that moral problems with animal research are similar to the problems Beecher described for human research. We describe cases that illustrate ethical deficiencies in the conduct of animal research, including inattention to the issue of consent or assent, incomplete surveys of the harms caused by specific protocols, inequitable burdens on research subjects in the absence of benefits to them, and insufficient efforts to provide ethical justification. We provide a set of recommendations to begin to address these deficits.

A new medical research model: ethically and responsibly advancing health for humans and animals.

With the increasing use of genomics, computational analytics, emerging technologies, and personalized medicine, the possibility of a new research model is emerging. Using the clues from thousands of species living on our planet, scientists from many disciplines (medicine, veterinary medicine, wildlife) must collaborate, prioritize, and strategize on how to address causes of health and disease. Such clues should guide disease prevention, as well as the development of innovative, efficacious, and gentler therapies. Geographic and language barriers must be broken down, and scientists--even within a single academic, corporate, or government research site--must be vigilant in seeking the help of nonmedical disciplines of colleagues from whence answers might come. The public will become more interested in and demanding of such a model, desiring that all family members (humans and animals) have an opportunity for a long and healthy life. Above all, such activities will be humanely conducted with outcomes having the greatest chance for success.

Medical science and the Cruelty to Animals Act 1876: A re-examination of anti-vivisectionism in provincial Britain.

The Cruelty to Animals Act 1876 was an important but ambiguous piece of legislation. For researchers it stymied British science, yet ensured that vivisection could continue under certain restrictions. For anti-vivisection protestors it was positive proof of the influence of their campaigns, yet overly deferent to Britain's scientific elite. In previous accounts of the Act and the rise of anti-vivisectionism, scientific medicine central to these debates has been treated as monolithic rather than a heterogeneous mix of approaches; and this has gone hand-in-hand with the marginalizing of provincial practices, as scholarship has focused largely on the 'Golden Triangle' of London, Oxford and Cambridge. We look instead at provincial research: brain studies from Wakefield and anthrax investigations in Bradford. The former case elucidates a key role for specific medical science in informing the anti-vivisection movement, whilst the latter demonstrates how the Act affected the particular practices of provincial medical scientists. It will be seen, therefore, how provincial medical practices were both influential upon, and profoundly affected by, the growth of anti-vivisectionism and the passing of the Act. This paper emphasises how regional and varied medico-scientific practices were central to the story of the creation and impact of the Cruelty to Animals Act.