{"componentChunkName":"component---src-templates-article-tsx","path":"/animalresearch","result":{"data":{"primeArticle":{"slug":"animalresearch","excerpt":"UCLA scientists claim using animals in biomedical research is “worth the sacrifice.” However, animal welfare activists say otherwise.","headline":"The ethics of animal experimentation at UCLA","author":"Annika Sial","authorbio":"","authoremail":"","authortwitter":"","coverimg":"https://assets3.dailybruin.com/images/animalresearch/prime.animalresearch.JZ.1.1-130beba4d4118a8c26f0d2d5c63ec26d.jpg","covercred":"Jason Zhu","coveralt":"Conceptual photo of experiments on mics","articleType":"article","updated":"This post was updated Aug. 30 at 5:55 p.m.","content":[{"type":"text","value":"Los Angeles is colloquially known as a center for the animal rights movement."},{"type":"text","value":"Yet, at the heart of West LA lies UCLA – a constant source of new medical research involving experimentation on animals."},{"type":"text","value":"Behind the production of most drugs, treatments and basic biomedical discoveries are laboratory facilities filled with animals used to conduct scientific research. Many of these animals are genetically or behaviorally altered to develop certain conditions – such as Parkinson’s disease, drug addictions or cancers – so researchers can learn more about these pathologies and develop new biological technology to treat them."},{"type":"text","value":"Every spring, LA’s two contrasting identities come into conflict. Protesters associated with groups such as In Defense of Animals and Progress For Science line the streets of Westwood and march across UCLA’s campus to stand against biomedical research involving animals, which they argue is a form of animal abuse. Meanwhile, biomedical animal researchers, some fearful and others angry, look on from inside their labs."},{"type":"text","value":"In 2015, the United States Department of Agriculture recorded 767,622 animals involved in biomedical research. This figure, however, excludes the mice, rats, fish and birds which are most commonly involved in research, instead only accounting for cats, dogs, guinea pigs, hamsters, nonhuman primates and most other mammals. Including the species more common in research, one study by two researchers affiliated with the Cruelty Free International Trust estimated the more accurate figure was 14,574,839. Research veterinarian Larry Carbone proposed the number of rats and mice alone was closer to 111.5 million."},{"type":"text","value":"UCLA used 1,349 USDA-covered animals for experiments, teaching, research, surgery or tests in 2020. While the number of other animals used is unclear, the UCLA Radiation Oncology Animal Core alone annually produces 59,000 mice that are used by more than 120 researchers at UCLA."},{"type":"text","value":"All scientific research involving animals is subject to federal regulations, namely the Animal Welfare Act and the Public Health Service Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, passed originally in 1966 and 1985, respectively."},{"type":"text","value":"Both of these regulations provide standards for care when animals are involved in research, although the AWA does not apply to rats, mice or non-mammals, and the PHS Policy only applies to institutions funded by Public Health Service grants. Altogether, the regulations establish minimum standards – such as the proper number of animals per cage and appropriate ventilation – for the treatment of research animals. The PHS Policy requires that every research institution have an Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee responsible for implementing those standards."},{"type":"text","value":"At UCLA, the Animal Research Committee serves as the institution’s IACUC. The ARC is made up of, at minimum, the Campus Veterinarian, a representative from the Office of Environment Health and Safety, three to five members from the Academic Senate with laboratory animal experience, at least one member who has non-scientific expertise and at least one member who is not affiliated with UCLA."},{"type":"text","value":"The ARC reviews requests for the use of animals in research and implements welfare guidelines in laboratories by conducting semiannual investigations in all UCLA research facilities using animals."},{"type":"text","value":"“Justification must be provided for the use of animals in the research, including the rationale for the species to be used, explaining why animals cannot be substituted for cellular or computer models and why phylogenetically less complex animals cannot be substituted,” said Nigel Maidment, the faculty chair of the ARC, in a written statement."},{"type":"text","value":"Maidment said it is common for the ARC to request further justification for animal research procedures and work with veterinarians to minimize animals’ suffering."},{"type":"text","value":"However, the ARC’s standards are sometimes not enough to prevent harm."},{"type":"text","value":"Between January 2018 and January 2020, UCLA reported five PHS Policy violations. These included specific instances where animal care personnel repeatedly failed to administer post-operative analgesics to mice and check on frogs on weekends."},{"type":"text","value":"UCLA was not penalized for any of these violations."},{"type":"text","value":"When COVID-19 struck, UCLA put nonessential research on pause in order to accommodate public health guidelines. According to Maidment, UCLA did not require the euthanization of any animals during this time. But some researchers chose to cull their laboratory animals anyway because their research was postponed, said Lindsay Lueptow, the Supervisor of UCLA’s Behavioral Testing Core. ARC Inspections were also waived between March and July 2020."},{"type":"pull","value":"{\"caption\":\"Between January 2018 and January 2020, UCLA reported five PHS Policy violations. These included specific instances where animal care personnel repeatedly failed to administer post-operative analgesics to mice and check on frogs on weekends.\"}"},{"type":"text","value":"The culling of research animals was unethical, wrote Shalin Gala, the Vice President of Internal Laboratory Methods at People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, in a letter to Chancellor Gene Block. Gala argued that if the research was not urgent enough to warrant its continuation over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, then it was not important enough to justify the harm done to animals in the process."},{"type":"text","value":"According to Gala and laboratory animal welfare advocates like him, the ethical concern with biomedical research involving animals is a matter of informed consent. Humans must always be made aware of potential risks and consent to the procedures being performed when participating in research. Animals, however, are incapable of understanding and accepting the potential consequences of experimentation."},{"type":"text","value":"“No matter how regulated the practice of animal experimentation is, it still will inflict enormous amounts of harm on these sentient creatures who have no consent in the matter,” Gala said. “They're not willingly volunteering for these procedures.”"},{"type":"text","value":"Gala’s letter called on UCLA to release information about animal experimentation in light of COVID-19 research ramp downs."},{"type":"text","value":"UCLA did not respond to the letter, according to Gala."},{"type":"text","value":"For people who aren’t involved with the process, the use of animals in biomedical research at UCLA is largely a mystery."},{"type":"text","value":"UCLA Newsroom’s post on “Animals in research and teaching at UCLA” uses the word “humane” four times. But while the same Newsroom post lauds the achievements of biomedical animal research at UCLA, it never explains what humane treatment means. The ARC, in a page about “Ethical Positions on Animal Use,” acknowledges that the term is unclear, but doesn’t address how they define or implement it aside from abstract requirements on cleanliness, diet, and health."},{"type":"pull","value":"{\"caption\":\"No matter how regulated the practice of animal experimentation is, it still will inflict enormous amounts of harm on these sentient creatures who have no consent in the matter.”\"}"},{"type":"text","value":"“Our approach to animal welfare is driven by a commitment to utilize best practices and conform to federal, state, and local regulations governing the research,” Maidment said."},{"type":"text","value":"UCLA’s lack of transparency has had consequences for some animals, whose fates after use in research remain unclear. California passed a bill in 2015 requiring cats and dogs used for research in postsecondary institutions to be offered to an adoption agency if possible. However, dogs and cats used for research at UCLA don’t have a clear path to finding their forever homes."},{"type":"text","value":"“UCLA does not have a formal process for adoption,” Jennifer Klahn, UCLA’s Director of Research Safety & Animal Welfare, said in a written statement. “Adoption of retired research animals is infrequent.”"},{"type":"image","value":"{\"alt\":\"Conceptual Photo of a mouse being injected.\",\"url\":\"https://assets3.dailybruin.com/images/animalresearch/prime.animalresearch.JZ.2.1-917ed4beab2c8984c087eaef15f53883.jpg\",\"credit\":\"Jason Zhu\",\"caption\":\"\"}"},{"type":"text","value":"In 2013, UCLA faced consequences for its evasiveness on matters of laboratory animal welfare. The animal rights organization Stop Animal Exploitation Now filed a lawsuit against the university for refusing to provide veterinary treatment records when requested through the California Public Records Act."},{"type":"text","value":"UCLA was required to release the records to SAEN in 2016 when a settlement was reached. But in 2019, the state of California passed a bill restricting the availability of research records for individuals filing public records requests, so animal research records are now less accessible to the public."},{"type":"text","value":"Despite the ethical and transparency-related concerns raised by animal rights activists, some labs feel that animal research is the only option to further science."},{"type":"text","value":"Michele Basso is a psychiatry and biobehavioral sciences and neurobiology professor as well as the director of the Fuster Laboratory of Cognitive Neuroscience. In the Fuster Laboratory, Basso conducts research on nonhuman primates and rodents in order to understand the mechanisms behind Parkinson’s disease."},{"type":"text","value":"Basso’s research necessitates the use of animals because it involves studying the intricate workings of both Parkinson’s disease and the brain itself, she said. Because scientists still have a limited understanding of Parkinson’s, it is currently impossible to even create the alternative models that could be used for her research, according to Basso."},{"type":"text","value":"Basso smiled as she talked about the primates she works with. She said she cares about the primates, provides them touch screen video monitors and spends more time with them than some parents do with their children."},{"type":"text","value":"She even feels that animals in her lab have better health care than some humans in the LA area, a sentiment she has repeatedly shared with Daily Bruin reporters when asked about her research."},{"type":"text","value":"But is the ability for primates to play video games sufficient compensation for the possibility of living a life free of a cage? Or is health care an acceptable trade-off for administering potentially harmful medical treatment?"},{"type":"text","value":"Scientists’ education may not provide sufficient training for them to address these ethical questions."},{"type":"text","value":"All personnel that have direct contact with animals are required to complete certification training with the ARC, which consists of online general training and species-specific training with both online and in-person components. These trainings serve to educate investigators on regulatory guidelines, personal responsibilities and techniques to handle research animals."},{"type":"text","value":"But there’s no specific requirement for education on bioethics or animal welfare philosophy, which some scientists claim might leave researchers poorly equipped to navigate the philosophical questions associated with animal experimentation."},{"type":"text","value":"Basso said she and her colleagues are constantly considering the ethics of using animals as the subjects of their research, but she said it is ultimately a question that should be answered by society."},{"type":"text","value":"Animal research is enshrined in our laws and affirmed by society whenever people visit the doctor or take medication, she explained."},{"type":"text","value":"“Every single medical breakthrough of the 20th and now 21st century has depended upon animal research. Period,” she said. “And our society has decided that that is okay. ... We are willing to sacrifice the lives of these animals for the potential benefits to humans and other animals.”"},{"type":"text","value":"But history has shown that something accepted by society or confirmed in the legal system is not always morally right. And in the face of institutionalized standards, people have the obligation to ask: do humans have the right to decide on animals’ behalf whether the research is, in Basso’s words, “worth the sacrifice?”"},{"type":"text","value":"Neuroscientist Emily Trunnell decided that they didn’t."},{"type":"text","value":"Trunnell earned her doctorate in neuroscience from the University of Georgia in 2016 after completing her doctoral research using mice and rats. In the process, however, she was disillusioned by the increasing numbers of mice that she was using and killing as part of her research."},{"type":"text","value":"“The fact that animals feel pain, and can feel joy and feel distress is the very basis that we use them in some of these experiments,” Trunnell said. “We have to take that to its logical conclusion – that if they feel the pain in the same way, if they feel psychological distress in the same way that we do, then the same rules should apply to them as well.”"},{"type":"text","value":"Trunnell now works with PETA to make recommendations to a variety of institutions, from universities to governments, for shifting away from the use of animals in research. She also communicates with IACUCs about potential alternatives to biomedical animal research, such as organoid models or voluntary human research, which she claims are more effective for understanding results in humans than animal models. But she said it’s difficult to shift research paradigms when most scientists, including those who sit on IACUC committees, are taught that using animal subjects for biomedical research is necessary."},{"type":"pull","value":"{\"caption\":\"Our society has decided that that is okay. ... We are willing to sacrifice the lives of these animals for the potential benefits to humans and other animals.”\"}"},{"type":"text","value":"There is a reason, though, that scientists at UCLA are particularly wary of lab animal welfare advocacy."},{"type":"text","value":"In 2009, neuroscientist David Jentsch was conducting research on drug addiction and schizophrenia using primates. That year on March 7, he woke up to find that animal welfare extremists had set fire to his car."},{"type":"text","value":"The arson of Jentsch’s car was part of a pattern of violent and destructive incidents against scientists conducting primate research at UCLA. It began in 2006 when the animal extremist group the Animal Liberation Front mistakenly placed an incendiary device at the front door of a UCLA neuroscientist’s neighbor, though the device did not detonate."},{"type":"text","value":"These incidents reverberated throughout the country: CNN, NPR and the LA Times all reported on the violence. Shortly following the attack on his car, Jentsch founded Pro-Test for Science, a group supporting the use of animals in biomedical research. Pro-Test for Science aims to educate people on the benefits of biomedical research and limit the obstacles faced by animal researchers."},{"type":"text","value":"Although Jentsch left UCLA in 2016 to work at Binghamton University, this incident, and the further history of violence towards researchers, has shaped the culture of fear around talking about animal research at UCLA."},{"type":"text","value":"Lueptow seemed hesitant to discuss her use of animals in research. Her eyes darted around the camera, she spoke deliberately, and, just outside the frame of the Zoom call, she appeared to be fidgeting with something on her desk out of view."},{"type":"text","value":"After she looked down at her desk for a moment, Lueptow admitted that she is careful about her language because she fears that her words could be misrepresented."},{"type":"text","value":"“Oftentimes our work and our words are taken out of context and used as ammunition against us,” she said."},{"type":"text","value":"And for Lueptow, this supposed misuse of language about animal research impacts not only the accurate representation of animal research but also her physical wellbeing and safety. She recalled threats and actual acts of violence perpetrated against other researchers, like Jentsch."},{"type":"text","value":"However, she believes that working as a self-professed animal lover in biomedical research allows her to care for her animal test subjects while reaping measurable benefits for health and science."},{"type":"text","value":"“I feel empathy for the animals we’re using, and I have a deep respect and thankfulness for being able to use them,” Lueptow said. “(Animal research) is an unfortunate necessity in order to get to the next level of understanding to advance medicine, to advance science. But when we do it the right way, I think we can do it responsibly in a way that doesn't harm animals unless absolutely necessary.”"},{"type":"text","value":"Yet, for others, the violent incidents were the beginning of a now seemingly irreparable wedge between biomedical researchers and animal welfare advocates – even those who are not violent extremists."},{"type":"image","value":"{\"alt\":\"Conceptual Photo of mice in a box.\",\"url\":\"https://assets3.dailybruin.com/images/animalresearch/prime.animalresearch.JZ.3.1-28bf7bb540c43839ee5b5e5075b52362.jpg\",\"credit\":\"Jason Zhu\",\"caption\":\"\"}"},{"type":"text","value":"Basso said that although she prioritizes animal welfare in her laboratory practices, she is reluctant to work with groups like PETA, which she claims are extremist because they often don’t tangibly work to improve animal welfare."},{"type":"text","value":"“They peddle in misinformation,” Basso said, alleging that animal welfare activists deliberately mislead the public about biomedical research involving animals."},{"type":"text","value":"In practice, however, scientists who conduct biomedical research on animals and animal welfare advocates also struggle to work together because they disagree on basic facts about animal research."},{"type":"text","value":"The divide is most clear when it comes to the mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccine. Animal welfare advocates argue that its rapid development proves that research involving animals is not necessary to make medical progress."},{"type":"text","value":"“When they were doing all this vaccine work, (scientists at the National Institutes of Health) were not waiting for the typical lengthy animal testing phase during standard vaccine and development research,” Gala said. “Instead, they went straight to human trials.”"},{"type":"text","value":"But Basso said animal research directly contributed to the creation of the mRNA-based vaccines. And according to Lueptow, it is a common misconception that the COVID-19 vaccine was conceived without animal testing when the technology used to create it has actually been going through animal and human trials for decades."},{"type":"text","value":"The reality lies somewhere in between. While the technology for the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines was cleared for human trials before completing animal trials, the mRNA mechanisms they use had already been tested on mice as early as 1990. Some scientists, however, say that using previously-tested existing technology may be a good model for animal-free biomedical innovations in the future."},{"type":"text","value":"UCLA is an academic institution, claiming to be committed to learning, progress and diverse perspectives. So why is it so difficult to have conversations considering the philosophical questions associated with biomedical animal research?"},{"type":"text","value":"It seems that biomedical researchers using animals and animal activists alike struggle to communicate because of years of tension. Collaboration could lead to new conclusions about when involving animals in biomedical research is appropriate. Instead, research animals lead lives of instability because they are caught in a very human conflict."},{"type":"text","value":"Next spring, when protesters again march along the streets of Westwood and biomedical researchers look on from the windows of their labs, the divide – and the charged tension, anger and sadness associated with it – will again come into focus."}]}},"pageContext":{"term":"summer21","slug":"animalresearch"}},"staticQueryHashes":[]}