Research with non-human participants Ethics in psychology What you need to know Basic statistics on animal experimentation in the UK There were 2.73 million experiments in 2002 About 80% are for research and drug development Safety testing accounts for most of the rest These figures are not complete and take no account of 'wasted' animals - animals bred for their tissues and then discarded or animals rejected because their genetic modifications did not work. If these were included in the annual statistics, the figures for animal use would be considerably higher. Which animals are used? Rodents 84% Fish, amphibians, reptiles 12% Large mammals 2.1% Small mammals (besides rodents) 1.4% Primates 0.1% Classic study Harry Harlow drew condemnation for his "pit of despair" experiments on rhesus macaque monkeys in the 1970s. The aim of the research was to produce an animal model of clinical depression. In 1974, American literary critic Wayne C. Booth wrote that, "Harry Harlow and his colleagues go on torturing their nonhuman primates decade after decade, invariably proving what we all knew in advance—that social creatures can be destroyed by destroying their social ties." Classic study Seligman (1965) conducted an experiment in which dogs were shocked. Some dogs were able to end the shocks, but those that had no control developed a sense of learned helplessness. The dogs in this group displayed clinical depression. A final classic study The monkey drug trials of 1969 were one such case. In this experiment, a large group of monkeys and rats were trained to inject themselves with an assortment of drugs, including morphine, alcohol, codeine, cocaine, and amphetamines. Once the animals were capable of self-injecting, they were left to their own devices with a large supply of each drug. The animals were so disturbed (as one would expect) that some tried so hard to escape that they broke their arms in the process. The monkeys taking cocaine suffered convulsions and in some cases tore off their own fingers (possible as a consequence of hallucinations), one monkey taking amphetamines tore all of the fur from his arm and abdomen, and in the case of cocaine and morphine combined, death would occur within 2 weeks. Why are animals used? They are similar to us both genetically and physiologically and hence good for drug testing. They breed faster than humans, so several generations can be observed over a shorter period. They age faster, so effects of childhood stress - for example can be observed on aging rats. They can be used for procedures that would be considered unethical for humans - e.g. isolation Arguments against the use of animals Similarities may be insufficient to generalize to human beings. Procedures that are deemed unethical for humans may cause similar suffering in nonhuman animals. Animals cannot communicate their distress, cannot withdraw from the experiment, and give no consent. Some feel that this is a human arrogance. BPS Guidelines The aim is to assist in the planning of research in order to minimize discomfort caused to living animals. In addition, they expect researchers to seek veterinary advice when unsure and to consider the following points: Do the ends justify the means of the research? Is there a way to minimize the suffering of the animal? Is the environment, food, and water appropriate for the animal? What is the minimum number of animals necessary? Moral guidelines If performing an experiment would cause more harm than not performing it, then it is ethically wrong to perform that experiment. In evaluating the good vs. harm of an experiment, one must consider the following: the moral value of a human being vs. a non-human animal the number of human beings who would benefit from the study the effect on humans if the study is not conducted the number of animals suffering in the experiment the harm done to the animals Moral guidelines However, it is not that simple for several reasons How does one compare the “value” of an animal vs. a human? Though the harm can be accurately predicted, the benefit of the experiment is often known. If we do not do an experiment, we will never know of its benefit. The Three R’s The Three R’s are a set of principles that psychologists and other scientists are encouraged to follow in order to clarify the moral guidelines. The Three R’s are: Reduction Refinement Replacement Reduction Reducing the number of animals used in experiments by: Improving experimental techniques Improving techniques of data analysis Sharing information with other researchers Refinement Refining the experiment or the way the animals are cared for so as to reduce their suffering by Using less invasive techniques Better medical care Better living and breeding conditions Replacement • Replacing experiments on animals with alternative techniques, such as: Experimenting on cell cultures instead of on whole animals Using computer models Studying more human volunteers Proposed EU Directive In November 2008 the European Union put forward proposals to revise the directive for the protection of animals used in scientific experiments in line with the three R principle of replacing, reducing and refining the use of animals in experiments. The main changes are outlined in the next slide. Proposed EU Directive to make it compulsory to carry out ethical reviews and require that experiments where animals are used be subject to authorization to require that only animals of second or older generations be used, to avoid taking animals from the wild and exhausting wild populations to state that alternatives to testing on animals must be used when available and that the number of animals used in projects be reduced to a minimum to require member states to improve the breeding, accommodation and care measures and methods used in procedures so as to eliminate or reduce to a minimum any possible pain, suffering, distress or lasting harm caused to animals introduces a ban on the use of great apes - chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas and orangutans - in scientific procedures, other than in exceptional circumstances.
