The Three Rs

 Let's get behind the NC3Rs, they're doing good work

Naturewatch's latest visit to the NC3Rs confirmed earlier impressions of a hard working, dedicated group who are absolutely committed to the 3Rs and animal welfare. A recurrent theme throughout our meeting was the need for accurate information, both in terms of quality statistics and of details about the nature of the procedures being performed.

Measuring the 3Rs

In our earlier meeting, we emphasised the need for benchmarks (or metrics) for measuring the progress of 3Rs research. Since then, the NC3Rs held a stakeholder meeting in January, at which there was a discussion group on the subject of metrics. At that meeting, there was a complaint that many groups pore over the Home Office statistics and try to deduce from them how successfully the 3Rs are being applied, and that this is a misuse of the statistics. This misses the point. It is hardly surprising that this happens: there is no other information to go on. (It is also not unknown for the Home Office to put a spin on the statistics, either!) The point of generating new metrics for 3Rs research is precisely to be able to measure more accurately what impact the 3Rs is having. The challenge will be to generate a set of statistics that are insightful without producing a profusion of data that ends up obscuring rather than enlightening. Some things should be fairly easy - for example, the proportion of rats in toxicology that are kept in enriched environments as opposed to wire-bottomed cages, which would be a significant refinement. The NC3Rs accepted these points and we await the final metrics with interest.

Brain research and the need for openness

Throughout the meeting we came up against the issues of openness and the availability of information. For example, when we discussed the potential of non-invasive imaging techniques (like MRI, CAT and PET) to replace invasive procedures, Vicky Robinson pointed out that, in some cases these techniques can be used to replace or reduce animal use. However, in reality imaging cannot always be used to answer the questions that more invasive methods are currently used for. For example, the imagers may produce great results but the resolution is nothing like that which can be obtained with a single electrode monitoring a single neuron. The ethics of using such an electrode is an important issue, but it would be untrue to claim that the imaging techniques can be used as a replacement for all areas of brain research. Furthermore, a non-invasive imager also has attendant welfare issues, such as the need to restrain the primate. It was agreed that the lack of information hampers an informed discussion here.

It was also said that Naturewatch's picture of the primate chair was unhelpful in that it stirs up controversy and thus further hinders the dissemination of information and willingness to be open. However, too often the research community retreats into a fortress mentality when a more upfront attitude to providing information could actually alleviate the situation. If such procedures are in fact not as horrific as they appear - a big if - then the research community does not need to be afraid of providing more detailed and more accurate information to counter what they perceive to be misinformation. If they remain hiding behind their parapets, unwilling to explain what happens, it is hardly suprising that we in the animal welfare world draw the conclusions that we do with the evidence that we have available.

The Human Genome Project

We also talked about the impact of the Human Genome project, and whether there would be a demand for the genetic modification of primates. It was argued that there would be very little demand for this, since most of the work could be obtained by genetically modifying mice. Moreover, the ineffiency of producing GM strains and the attendant husbandry costs would be prohibitive.

Supporting the NC3Rs

Those who hold to an idealistic commitment to an absolute ban on all animal experiments immediately will probably remain bitterly opposed the application of the 3Rs and thus to the NC3Rs. However, for the best chances of making a real difference to the lives of animals undergoing experiments, the NC3Rs should be strongly supported. They are acquiring the means to make major progress in the welfare of animals involved in experiments.

Back to the Three Rs index