Abstract

Introduction: The Three R´s Principle (Refinement, Reduction, and Replacement), postulated more than 60 years ago, is the main ethical framework currently applied for conducting animal research. This principle has never been reviewed applying a philosophical reflection during all of these years, even though a variety of animal ethics studies have presented new insights. The Three R´s Principle was designed to be used as a policy tool to ameliorate the suffering of animals and to reduce the use of animals in research, but has failed in achieving these goals. This principle is only applied when using sentience vertebrates, and fails to consider invertebrates as their capacity to sentience is still disputed. In this way, invertebrates are reified, which has been determined to be detrimental as their suffering has been consistently denied. As a consequence, new insights are necessary to improve scientific practices. Epistemology and ethics have always been viewed as opposing approaches. ´Epistemology-based Ethics’ subordinate ethical concern to scientific facts and ‘Ethics-based Epistemology’ purports that ethical practice should guide epistemological practices. Objective: In this paper, we maintain that unifying both approaches under a broader conceptual framework may result in the view that these are not, actually, opposite approaches. We propose to progress beyond the Three R’s Principle and extend it to a position equal to the level of the ethical and epistemological approaches. We also propose to use the Precautionary Principle as it is always better to be safe than sorry, and to include two more Rs. Methods: This paper is based on the analysis of different ethical frameworks used in biology and ecology that can be implemented in invertebrates experimentation. Results: The analysis revealed that different ethical approaches are frequently used in biological research, but not all of them are implemented in experimental research that involves invertebrates. We argue that the ethical considerations used in any research field can be implemented in invertebrate research. Conclusion: We propose a Five R´s Principle: the traditional Refinement, Reduction, and Replacement, used along with Respect and Responsibility (a respectful relationship with every living being regardless of its complexity and personal commitment to conscientiously apply ethics concepts).

Highlights

  • The Three Rs Principle (Refinement, Reduction, and Replacement), postulated more than 60 years ago, is the main ethical framework currently applied for conducting animal research

  • We provide new insights that support the ethical consideration of the majority of cases in which animals are used in research

  • We propose to extended the Three R Principle to a position in which the ethical and epistemological approaches are at the same level

Read more

Summary

Invertebrates in experiments

Invertebrates represents a heterogeneous group of animals that consist in more than 30 phyla ranging from sponges (extremely simple multicellular organisms) to cephalopods (organisms that display complex behaviors and can solve simple problems). Russell and Burch (1959) defined Replacement as “any scientific method employing non-sentient material [to] replace methods which use conscious living vertebrates”; Reduction as diminishing “the number of animals used to obtain information of a given amount and precision”; and Refinement as a series of practices conducted to “decrease in the incidence or severity of [...] procedures applied to those animals which have to be used” These three concepts are considered to incur the same level of significant but were originally postulated as a sequence to achieve the goal of total replacement as a maxim: “[r]efinement is never enough, and we should always seek further for reduction and if possible replacement” (Russell & Burch, 1959). After much research effort, controversy still remains due to the inherent difficulty of demonstrating the capacity of experiencing pain by this group of invertebrates (Harvey-Clark, 2011) With this framework, it is assumed that we first must evidence that animals are capable of suffering pain and, we should seek ethical considerations. We believe that science can be exercised within a new bio-ethical framework that includes these new concepts and ideas

Precautionary Principle
Findings
Concluding Remarks
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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 call