A study of three IACUCs and their views of scientific merit and alternatives.
Two ethical issues facing Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees [IACUCs] today are assessing scientific merit and the use of alternatives in research proposals. This study evaluated 3 IACUCs using a 19-question survey, with a 77.8% response rate. Although 76% of members answered that scientific merit should be more dili-gently assessed if more than slight pain is caused, 14% believed that assessing scien-tific merit is not the role of the IACUC. Nearly 86% agreed that the search for alterna-tives should be more diligent for protocols that incur more than slight pain to the animals involved. Some members believed that alternatives were not actively enough sought after, while others believed no viable alternatives existed. Additional guide-lines are needed to clarify these issues.
Center for Animals and Public Policy, Tufts University School of Veterinary Medicine, USA. Kmg27@hotmail.com
Karen
K
Graham
D000826:Animal Testing Alternatives / Q000941:ethics; D000827:Animal Welfare / Q000941:ethics; D000818:Animals; D000830:Animals, Laboratory / Q000523:psychology*; D026688:Bioethical Issues; D026724:Ethical Review; D007407:Interviews as Topic; D010146:Pain; D012107:Research Design; D012108:Research Personnel / Q000941:ethics / Q000523:psychology*; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires