FBR's Position on Animal Research
Animal research has played a vital role in virtually every major medical advance of the last century - for both human and veterinary health. From antibiotics to blood transfusions, from dialysis to organ transplantation, from vaccinations to chemotherapy, bypass surgery and joint replacement, practically every present-day protocol for the prevention, treatment, cure and control of disease, pain and suffering is based on knowledge attained through research with lab animals.
The anti-research element of animal rights movement frequently claims that the results of animal studies can't be applied to human health. However, physicians and researchers overwhelmingly agree that animal systems provide invaluable and irreplaceable insights into human systems because there are striking similarities between the physiological and genetic systems of animals and humans. The essential need for animal research is recognized and supported by medical societies and health agencies around the world. Concrete proof of its validity can also be found in the vast body of Nobel Prize winning work in physiology and medicine that has been based on animal studies.
Since 1900, modern medicine has boosted the average life span in the United States by almost 30 years. In 1999, infant mortality in the USA - a key indicator of the nation's health - was measured at seven deaths per 1,000 live births compared to 55 deaths per 1,000 live births in 1935.
Many diseases that once killed millions of people every year are now either preventable, treatable or have been eradicated altogether. Immunizations against polio, diphtheria, mumps, rubella and hepatitis save countless lives and the survival rates for many major diseases are at an all time high thanks to the discovery of new drugs and the design of sophisticated medical devices and surgical procedures.
Animal research has also resulted in many remarkable life-saving and life-extending treatments for cats, dogs, farm animals, wildlife and endangered species. Pacemakers, artificial joints, organ transplants and freedom from arthritic pain are just a few of the breakthroughs made in veterinary medicine thanks to animal research. Vaccinations for rabies, distemper, parvo virus, infectious hepatitis, anthrax, tetanus and feline leukemia ensure that dogs, cats, sheep, cattle, deer and foxes live longer, happier, healthier lives. New treatments for glaucoma, heart disease, cancer, hip dysplasia and traumatic injuries extend and enhance the lives of beloved companion animals.
For humane, compassionate and scientific reasons, researchers are deeply concerned about the condition of the animals they study. This is not a controversial position; there is no constituency for inhumane treatment. Poor care results in unreliable research data. For results to be valid, animal subjects must be healthy. Also, pain and distress are thought to have negative impact on the immune system, so researchers are careful to protect their animals from undue stress. It is well recognized that laboratory animals have been indispensable in the cause of medical and scientific discovery. We have a moral duty to provide them the best care and treatment possible.
The USDA has set forth federal regulations governing the care and use of laboratory animals in biomedical research that are more extensive that those covering human subjects. The AWA (Animal Welfare Act) sets high standards of care for lab animals with regard to their housing, feeding, cleanliness, ventilation and medical needs. It also requires the use of anesthesia or analgesic drugs for potentially painful procedures and during post-operative care. Most importantly, research institutions are required - by law - to establish an Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) to oversee all work with animals. The IACUCs require researchers to justify their need for animals; select the most appropriate species and use the fewest number of animals possible to answer a specific question. All IACUCs include at least one veterinarian and one community representative, unaffiliated with the institution. These committees have the authority to reject any research proposal and stop any project it believes has failed to meet proper standards. The U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) Act requires that all institutions receiving research funds from the National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration or the Centers for Disease Control, adhere to the standards set out in the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. Under the PHS policy, institutions must follow detailed animal care recommendations and establish an IACUC to ensure that all animals are treated responsibly and humanely.
Those who work in the medical field and see the effects of disease feel no ambivalence about the value of animal research. Although research opponents portray the medical community as deeply divided over the merits of animal research, a survey by the American Medical Association found that 99 percent of active physicians in the U.S. believed that animal research had contributed to medical progress, and 97 percent supported the continued humane and responsible use of animals for basic and clinical research. More recently, a survey of living Nobel Laureates for medicine found unanimous support for animal research.
|
