Quote:
Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek
AKA_Monet this is very interesting. I don't know why this hasn't been discussed before on this thread. I agree with you though. Me personally, I think there needs to be something in place to develop non animal alternatives to the use of animals in research and education. I mean just to kill animals because they're not being used for experiments is not right at all. I think fewer animals can be used to obtain the same amount data or allow more information to be obtained from a given number of animals. I think this would decrease the total number of animals that have to be used. I also think that refinement alternatives would be nice too, because it would lessen animals pain and distress. I mean, think about it. If more refinement alternatives are developed, I think it's appropriate to assume that if a procedure is painful to humans, it will also be painful to animals. Anesthetics and/or analgesics could be used to alleviate any potential pain. That's sad to just euthanize them just because they're not going to be used. I see why it makes you upset. I think this is great topic though.
|
What you just stated are the OLAW rules... But folks in research, with exceptions, are clueless and to be honest just don't care...
Lately, there are stop-gaps in place: I.e. having approval to do animal experiments shown to the publication journals or the journals retract the paper... Losing laboratory space and privilege to use animals for studies if there are violations.
My lab before this one had GROSS violations. My current lab, does not have too many violations, but the personnel's apathy about "minimizing the use and care of animals" is absent... When there are no ENFORCEABLE PUNITIVE regulations in place, then that permits a lapse in appropriate care and use of laboratory animals...
But my husband told me some of his stories and he had to do large animals, which I would have a tough time doing... And I know some vets that have to do primates, now that's tough overall.
Threaded Mode
