Kamandalu Journal of Biodiversity and Biotechnology

The KJBB is highly concerned about animal care and uses by following National Committee for Research Ethics in Science and Technology (NENT), 2018. The ethical assessments related to the use of animals in research are wide-ranging. It is generally thought that it may be necessary to use laboratory animals in some cases in order to create improvements for people, animals, or the environment. At the same time, the general opinion is that animals have a moral status and that our treatment of them should be subject to ethical considerations. Such views are reflected in the following positions:

(i) Animals have an intrinsic value that must be respected.

(ii) Animals are sentient creatures with the capacity to feel pain, and the interests of animals must therefore be taken into consideration.

(iii) Our treatment of animals, including the use of animals in research, is an expression of our attitudes and influences us as moral actors.

The guidelines reflect all these positions and stipulate principles and considerations that can be used as tools when balancing between harm and benefit. The three Rs (Replace, Reduce, Refine) are established principles that are also enshrined in legislation. These principles can establish absolute limits for experiments on animals, even when there are great benefits. These principles also state what can reasonably be considered harm and benefit, and the principles thus facilitate good assessments. Assessments of harm and benefit associated with experiments on animals are particularly demanding, because experiments may result in researchers intentionally causing actual harm to animals, while the future benefits are often uncertain.

The guidelines are dynamic and must be reviewed in line with technological developments and the appearance of new ethical issues. New gene technology methods create new opportunities for the use of genetically modified animals in research, which is a growing trend. Genetically modifying laboratory animals, i.e. changing the genetic material of laboratory animals using gene technology, gives rise to a special responsibility in that this method entails a double intervention: first, intervention in the animal's genetic material and second, use of the animal as a research object. This practice has the potential to change our view of humans and our attitudes towards generating or eliminating genetic characteristics in ourselves. 

These guidelines provide a framework that also covers ethical questions associated with the use of genetically modified animals in research. 

Definitions

In these guidelines, the term «research» must be understood broadly, and include planning, execution, and dissemination. The guidelines primarily address the «researcher» but apply to any person involved when animals are used for research, including funding and approval bodies, which are also responsible for making ethical assessments of projects involving experiments on animals. 

The guidelines cover «laboratory animals», as defined in the Regulations Relating to the Use of Animals in Research, but also cover all animals that are otherwise impacted by research activities.

Guidelines

1. Respect for animals' dignity

Researchers must have respect for animals' worth, regardless of their utility value, and for animals' interests as living, sentient creatures. Researchers must be respectful when choosing their topic and methods, and when disseminating their research. Researchers must provide care that is adapted to the needs of each laboratory animal.

2. Responsibility for considering options (Replace)

Researchers are responsible for studying whether there are alternatives to experiments on animals. Alternative options must be prioritized if the same knowledge can be acquired without using laboratory animals. If no good options are available, researchers should consider whether the research can be postponed until alternative methods have been developed. When justifying experiments on animals, researchers therefore must be able to account for the absence of options and the need to acquire knowledge immediately.

3. The principle of proportionality: responsibility for considering and balancing suffering and benefit

Researchers must consider the risk that laboratory animals experience pain and other sufferings (see guideline 5) and assess them in relation to the value of the research for animals, people, or the environment. Researchers are responsible for considering whether the experiment may result in improvements for animals, people, or the environment. The possible benefits of the study must be considered, substantiated, and specified in both the short and the long term. The responsibility also entails an obligation to consider the scientific quality of the experiments and whether the experiments will have relevant scientific benefits. 

Suffering can only be caused to animals if this is counterbalanced by a substantial and probable benefit for animals, people, or the environment. 

There are many different methods for analyzing harm and benefit. Research institutions should provide training on suitable models, and researchers are responsible for using such methods of analysis when planning experiments on animals.

4. Responsibility for considering reducing the number of animals (Reduce)

Researchers are responsible for considering whether it is possible to reduce the number of animals the experiment plans to use and must only include the number necessary to maintain the scientific quality of the experiments and the relevance of the results. This means, among other things, that researchers must conduct literature studies, consider alternative experiment designs, and perform design calculations before beginning experiments. 

5. Responsibility for minimizing the risk of suffering and improving animal welfare (Refine)

Researchers are responsible for assessing the expected effect on laboratory animals. Researchers must minimize the risk of suffering and provide good animal welfare. Suffering includes pain, hunger, thirst, malnutrition, abnormal cold or heat, fear, stress, injury, illness, and restrictions on the ability to behave normally/naturally. 

A researcher's assessment of what is considered acceptable suffering should
be based on the animals that suffer the most. If there are any doubts regarding perceived suffering, consideration of the animals must be the deciding factor. 

Researchers must not only consider the direct suffering that may be endured during the experiment itself, but also the risk of suffering before and after the experiment, including trapping, labeling, anesthetizing, breeding, transportation, stabling, and euthanizing. This means that researchers must also take into account the need for periods of adaptation before and after the experiment.

6. Responsibility for maintaining biological diversity 

Researchers are responsible for ensuring that the use of laboratory animals does not endanger biological diversity. This means that researchers must consider the consequences to the stock and to the ecosystem as a whole. The use of endangered and vulnerable species must be reduced to an absolute minimum. When it is credible but uncertain, the knowledge that the inclusion of animals in research or the use of certain methods may have ethically unacceptable consequences for the stock and the ecosystem as a whole, researchers must observe the precautionary principle.[1]

7. Responsibility when intervening in a habitat

Researchers are responsible for reducing disruption and any impact on the natural behavior of individual animals, including those that are not direct subjects of research, as well as of populations and their surroundings. Certain research and technology-related projects, like those regarding environmental technology and environmental surveillance, may impact animals and their living conditions, for example as a result of installing radar masts, antennas, or other measurement instruments. In such cases,  researchers must seek to observe the principle of proportionality (see guideline 3) and minimize the possible negative impact.

8. Responsibility for openness and sharing of data and material

Researchers are responsible for ensuring that there is transparency about research findings and facilitating the sharing of data and material from experiments on animals. Such transparency and sharing are important in order to avoid unnecessary repetition of experiments. Transparency is also important in order to ensure that the public is informed and is part of the researchers' responsibility for dissemination. 

In general, the negative results of experiments on animals should be public knowledge. Disclosing negative results may give other researchers information about which experiments are not worth pursuing, shine a light on unfortunate research designs, and help reduce the use of animals in research.

9. Requirement of expertise in animals

Researchers and other parties who handle live animals must have adequately updated and documented expertise on animals. This includes specific knowledge about the biology of the animal species in question, and a willingness and ability to take care of animals properly. 

10. Requirement of due care

There are national laws and rules and international conventions and agreements regarding the use of laboratory animals, and both researchers and research managers must comply with these. Any person who plans to use animals in experiments must familiarise themselves with the current rules.