You are here: Home / Journal Articles / A study of three IACUCs and their views of scientific merit and alternatives / About

A study of three IACUCs and their views of scientific merit and alternatives

By K. Graham

View Resource (HTM)

Licensed under

Category Journal Articles
Abstract

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 diligently assessed if more than slight pain is caused, 14% believed that assessing scientific merit is not the role of the IACUC. Nearly 86% agreed that the search for alternatives should be more diligent for protocols that incure more than slight pain to the animals involved. Some members believed that alternatives were not actively enough sourght after, while others believed that no viable alternatives existed. Additional guidelines are needed to clarify these issues.

Publication Title Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science
Volume 5
Issue 1
Pages 75-81
ISBN/ISSN 1088-8705
Publisher Taylor & Francis
DOI 10.1207/S15327604JAWS0501_7
Language English
Author Address Center for Animals and Public Policy, Tufts University School of Veterinary Medicine, Medford, Massachusetts, USA.Kmg27@hotmail.com
Cite this work

Researchers should cite this work as follows:

Tags
  1. Agencies and organizations
  2. Alternative methods
  3. Animal experimentation
  4. Animal research
  5. Animal rights
  6. Animal testing
  7. Animal welfare
  8. Assessment
  9. Developed countries
  10. Ethics
  11. Laboratory and experimental animals
  12. Laboratory animal science
  13. North America
  14. OECD countries
  15. Pain
  16. peer-reviewed
  17. surveys
  18. United States of America
Badges
  1. peer-reviewed