User:Dina.Shafi/sandbox

= Principles of animal research ethics = Principles of animal research ethics by Tom L. Beauchamp and David DeGrazia, published by Oxford University Press in 2020, is a book that focuses on the moral guidelines and ethics regarding animal testing used in scientific research by applying six principles. As opposed to the authors Burch and Russel of the influential book "Principles of humane experimental technique" which established the so-called Three Rs, this book focuses more on the moral framework rather than general principles.

What are the Three Rs?
The principles of the Three Rs as originally proposed by the Universities Federation for Animal Welfare (UFAW), are described by Russel and Burch as;

Replacement: the substitution of sentient animals by less sentient ones or non-animal methods in experiments.

Reduction: the reduction of the number of sentient animals used in experiments.

Refinement: Refinement research techniques to decrease the amount and severity of the pain and distress experienced by animals in experiments and to increase their well-being.

Russell and Burch described them in this order reflecting the order in which they should be addressed: (1) that sentient animals should not be used if non-sentient alternatives are available; (2) if animals do have to be used, then the project’s design and analysis should be such that the minimum number of sentient animals are used compatible with achieving the objectives of the research; and (3) that appropriate measures should be taken to mitigate any pain suffering or distress that the animals might feel.

Summary
This book presents a framework of general principles of animal research ethics that should be acceptable to representatives of both animal research and animal protection communities.

Proceeding from the two core values of animal research ethics; social benefit and animal welfare; the authors of this book came up with six principles. Each of the six principles presents a necessary condition of morally justified research, in which animal studies should not be conducted if the requirements of even one of these principles are not satisfied.

The first three principles of social benefit are the no-alternative method, expected net benefit and sufficient value to justify harm. The principles of animal welfare include no unnecessary harm, basic needs and upper limits to harm.

This book also includes critical commentary from experts of various scientific backgrounds.

The purpose of this book is to articulate a framework of principles capable of promoting consensus about the core values of animal research ethics, ensure the socially beneficial involvement of animals used in research and avoid inflicting harm to them. While this framework is compatible with the Three-Rs framework, it calls for a more thorough assessment of costs, risks, and benefits and a more comprehensive conception of animal-subjects protection.

Reception
As previously stated, the authors of this book incorporated commentary from experts of various disciplines. The following paragraph includes not all, but some comments on the book.

Julian Savulescu, a doctor in medicine and philosophy, mentioned that “The six principles of Beauchamp and DeGrazia (BD) are arguably the most constructive step forward in the ethics of animal experimentation in the past fifty years”. Although having forgotten to discuss some important information in the book, Margret S. Landi, a veterinarian, still believes that “the six principles must be seriously considered in discussions and debates about the conditions of morally justified animal research”. Comparing this book to the work presented by Russel and Burch in 1959, Brian Hare, an associate professor of evolutionary biology agrees that “Beauchamp and DeGrazia have succeeded in providing a useful moral framework and argue convincingly that their principles move beyond the limitations of the time-tested Three-Rs model”. Although the six principles fail to address ethics of research that might require invasive animal research, Brian asserts that “Even with these limitations, Beauchamp and DeGrazia have done a great service in making a convincing case for these six moral principles”.

The essential place of moral justification
There are three reasons why research using animals in controlled circumstances requires moral justification: it causes harm to the animals, animals cannot give consent, and it does not offer any medical benefit to the animals. Researchers and institutions have a responsibility to provide moral and scientific justifications for their use of animals for the choice of animal model, and for the number of animals used, while animal care and use committees should evaluate whether these justifications are adequate.

Principles of social benefit
The first three principles of social benefit of research include (1) the no alternative method in which animals can be exploited only if the social benefits pursued in a research study are not ethically obtainable through alternative methods that do not use live animals such as cell cultures, human tissues or computer models. (2) Expected net benefit states that the prospect of social benefit must outweigh its expected costs and risks to human beings. “Risks” refer to possibilities of harm to humans and “costs” refers to projected financial costs and opportunity costs. Furthermore, the prospect of benefit must exceed total anticipated costs and risks to human beings in order to conduct ethical research. And (3) Sufficient value to justify harm meaning that the net benefit for human society must justify the harm to animal subjects.

Principles of animal welfare
Researchers and other parties are obligated to acknowledge the moral importance of animal welfare in their actions. To justify harming animal subjects while conducting research, three additional principles pertaining to animal welfare must be satisfied. (1) No unnecessary harm prohibits causing harm (pain, distress, suffering, etc) unless the harm is unavoidable because of morally justified scientific objectives which satisfy the principles of social benefit. (2) Basic needs entail meeting animals' essential needs (psychological and social needs) for health, well-being, and welfare unless failure to meet one or more basic needs is unavoidable. Basic needs include; safe shelter, nutritious food and clean water, veterinary care, etc. (3) And upper limits to harm which prohibits animal subjects from enduring severe and long-lasting suffering.

Ethical review committees play a crucial role in reviewing and approving animal research protocols and ensuring animal welfare. The European Union already has a directive in place that establishes criteria for determining levels of harm and includes lists of prohibited procedures and conditions that cause harm.

The crucial role of ethics review committee
Ethics review committees in animal research should prioritize ethical analysis and justification alongside scientific evaluations. Animal care and use committees must conduct reviews in a way that is free of conflicts of interest that thwart objectivity in the appraisal of protocols.

On the Principles of Humane Experimental Techniques
The framework of six principles of animal research ethics builds upon the "Three Rs" principles of Burch and Russel. The Three Rs focus on replacing, reducing, and refining research methods to improve animal welfare and reduce harm.

The present document criticizes the Three-Rs framework and proposes a new framework of six principles. The criticism points out that the Three-Rs framework fails to acknowledge the harm caused to animal subjects and does not set limits on the severity and duration of permissible harm despite its refinement requirement. It also neglects the principles of social benefit and animal welfare. The proposed framework aims to fill several gaps left by Russel and Burch and provides guidance for researchers, animal care committees, and others.

Book quotations
“Sentient animals matter morally, and the core values of animal research ethics are social benefit and animal welfare”.

“Investigators and other accountable parties have professional responsibilities to provide explicit moral and scientific justifications for their proposed uses of animals, for the choice of animal model, and for the number of animals used”.

“The moral importance of the welfare of animal subjects is recognized globally in laws and codes”.

“The moral charge assigned to these committees for review and approval gives them a profoundly important role in the protection of animal welfare”. “The quality of review is generally enhanced when committees have their members in conversation about substantive, and sometimes contentious, matters of ethics”. “These committees are, in ideal circumstances, primarily ethics review committees, not principally scientific review committees, although scientific expertise and a command of pertinent scientific information are usually essential for proper ethics review”.