Abstract
Simple SummaryMillions of animals are used for scientific purposes in the EU every year. The procedures they undergo often cause significant pain, suffering and distress. New gene editing technologies now potentially offer a new and feasible way to genetically modify research animals in order to reduce or eliminate their ability to feel pain and to suffer. In this paper, we discuss the ethical concerns this new technology and new possibility raise and evaluate the implications of such genetic modifications with regards to the legal regulations in animal research in Europe.Every year, around 12 million animals are used for the purpose of scientific research in the European Union alone. The procedures performed on them often cause significant pain and suffering. Despite regulations aimed at reducing this suffering, we can expect millions of research animals to continue to suffer in the near to mid-term future. Given this reality, we propose the use of gene editing to create research animals with a reduced capacity for suffering, in particular, from pain. We argue that our proposal would be in line with moral principles embedded in European regulations regarding animal research, and that it would facilitate compliance with these regulations. We also respond to the strongest argument against our proposal—the ‘no pain no gain’ argument.
Highlights
Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 1PT, UK; Institute for Biomedical Ethics and History of Medicine, University of Zurich, 8006 Zurich, Switzerland
The animals would still be able to feel and react to the stimulus that would normally be painful, but would suffer less from it since it would no longer be perceived as painful; it would no longer cause a negative subjective experience In this paper, we focus on genetic disenhancement to reduce the suffering of research animals by intervening in the affective dimension of pain
We argue that creating research animals with a reduced capacity to suffer from pain would (i) in many cases be in line with the widely accepted moral obligation to reduce suffering if we can (3Rs), (ii) facilitate the harm-benefit analyses in project evaluations required by the Directive, and (iii) challenge, and reduce the scope of, the ‘no pain no gain’ argument against the widespread use of pain relief in research animals
Summary
Around 12 million animals are used in scientific research in the European Union (EU). The Directive instructs scientists to demonstrate, in a harm-benefit-analysis, that “the harm to the animals in terms of suffering, pain and distress is justified by the expected outcome taking into account ethical considerations, and may benefit human beings, animals or the environment” [4], article 38.2.(d)). These two requirements set out in the Animals 2019, 9, 154; doi:10.3390/ani9040154 www.mdpi.com/journal/animals. In the EU, the number of animals used for scientific purposes has remained more or less constant over the last 10 years [1,7], and there is currently no indication that this number will substantially decrease in the near or mid-term future
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.
