Abstract
Simple SummaryThis study analyzed the membership of animal experimentation oversight committees at leading U.S. research institutions. We found the leadership and general membership of these committees to be dominated by animal researchers and the remainder of the committees to be largely comprised of other institutional representatives. These arrangements may contribute to previously-documented committee biases in favor of approving animal experiments and dilute input from the few members representing animal welfare and the interests of the general public.Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees (IACUCs) were created to review, approve and oversee animal experiments and to balance the interests of researchers, animals, institutions and the general public. This study analyzed the overall membership of IACUCs at leading U.S. research institutions. We found that these committees and their leadership are comprised of a preponderance of animal researchers, as well as other members who are affiliated with each institution; some of whom also work in animal laboratories. This overwhelming presence of animal research and institutional interests may dilute input from the few IACUC members representing animal welfare and the general public, contribute to previously-documented committee bias in favor of approving animal experiments and reduce the overall objectivity and effectiveness of the oversight system.
Highlights
In response to growing public concerns about the welfare of animals in laboratories stemming from exposés of abuse at several high-profile federally-funded research facilities, in 1985 U.S.Congress and the Public Health Service (PHS) mandated the institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC) system to oversee vertebrate animal use and ensure compliance with federal regulations and guidelines [1]
The current study examined IACUC membership at the top 25 National Institutes of Health (NIH)funded research institutions, which was based on the total value of all NIH grants awarded in 2010 [16]
Our review of IACUC membership at the 21 institutions examined in our study revealed that their composition was imbalanced (Table 2)
Summary
In response to growing public concerns about the welfare of animals in laboratories stemming from exposés of abuse at several high-profile federally-funded research facilities, in 1985 U.S. Congress and the Public Health Service (PHS) mandated the institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC) system to oversee vertebrate animal use and ensure compliance with federal regulations and guidelines [1]. Many studies have explored the subjective experiences of IACUC members and documented the dynamic process of how full committees deliberate protocols under review [2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]. This work has found great variability in individual IACUC members’ interpretation of what constitutes the ethics of animal research, what their personal roles on the committee are and what the committee’s overall responsibilities and authority are. Researchers have described how these committees’ decision-making is significantly shaped by personal and political dynamics among members
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
