The Hindu : Opinion / Editorials : MAKING RESEARCH HUMANE

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Wednesday, Sep 29, 2004

Opinion

Opinion - Editorials

MAKING RESEARCH HUMANE

WHEN IT COMES to conducting experiments on animals, drawing the line is difficult. This applies virtually to every country independent of its scientific research ethic. India is no exception. Sentient creatures such as monkeys, dogs, rabbits, and horses that are subjected to painful experiments for obtaining data on drug and chemical safety often do not survive the process and are "euthanised." This is an unpleasant aspect of science that provokes a strong reaction from animal rights activists. With its new guidelines on animal research, the Union Ministry for Environment and Forests (MoEF) seeks to bridge the gulf between activist outrage and frustrated science. It lays down conditions that will enable animal experiments to go on without causing undue anguish to champions of animal rights. There have been high profile and aggressive interventions by campaigners to free animals from scientific institutions. The guidelines, which can help these research agencies put the controversies behind them, incorporate the progressive regulations in force in Europe and the United States besides adding a unique requirement: the animals that survive experimentation must be rehabilitated at the expense of the agency pursuing the research.

The MoEF guidelines, which will be enforced by the Committee for the Purpose of Control and Supervision of Experiments on Animals (CPCSEA), seek to eliminate grey areas. They clarify what constitutes an experiment, place animals on a phylogenetic scale of sentience of 0 to 100 (with chimpanzees at the top and cockroaches at the bottom), and prescribe standards for the quality of laboratory animals, their upkeep, and their access to veterinary care. Rodents, dogs, rabbits, and cats rank between 50 and 75 on the sentience scale. There must be sufficient justification for subjecting them to experiments causing pain or suffering. There must also be an exhaustive review of existing data to see that the wheel is not reinvented at the cost of animal rights. Experiments involving primates and dogs have been opposed in India on the ground that the specimens were chosen at random and did not come from a breeding programme. The CPCSEA has suggested that major animal centres should have dedicated breeding units to produce specimens of uniform genetic quality.

Popular opinion in countries that have been conducting animal research for a long time has been mixed. While in the United States a series of polls has revealed a firm majority in favour of animal experimentation, in the United Kingdom the situation is rather different. A 1999 poll by New Scientist found that when asked "cold," only 24 per cent of the British public favoured animal research; however, when a preamble was included to explain why scientists believed such experiments would hasten progress in medicine, a slim majority favoured animal research. The `golden mean' on this difficult issue may be found in the "3 R" philosophy propounded by W.M.S. Russell and R.J. Burch in 1959 in The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique. Their recommendations, which are part of British law, urge that experimental procedures be "refined" to minimise suffering, "reduced" by actually involving fewer animals, and "replaced" with more modern tools. The MoEF's guidelines must help scientific institutions and laboratories shift to a new era of transparency and, where feasible, friendly interaction with animal welfare constituencies. More scientists must volunteer their services to the ethics committees of the CPCSEA. Such a partnership will help experiments on remedies for HIV/AIDS and other diseases to move forward. On their part, animal rights activists must respect the integrity and progressive needs of science instead of coming up, from time to time, with over-the-top demands and irrational militancy.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

News Update

Stories in this Section

COMMUNAL THUGGERY IN KERALA

MAKING RESEARCH HUMANE

A conversation in New York

The web of e-governance

Detente process

BJP's fortunes

Omissions & deletions

Religious intolerance

Savarkar question

Sorry state

Take the cue