1. ｱﾊﾞｵﾗﾘｰﾈﾙﾋﾞﾙﾊﾞｵ July 26, 2010
Animal Welfare すずき先生
Animal Welfare on the Mice-Malaria Experiment
Animal welfare is a touchy issue and has been generating enough controversies
since 1822 (when the British Richard Martin shepherded a bill through Parliament
offering protection from cruelty to cattle, horses, and sheep). Martin was among the
founders of the world's first animal welfare organization, the Society for the
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (or SPCA), in 1824. In 1840, Queen Victoria gave
the society her blessing, and it became the RSPCA.
Meanwhile, Saunders Comprehensive Veterinary Dictionary defined animal welfare
as "the avoidance of abuse and exploitation of animals by humans by maintaining
appropriate standards of accommodation, feeding and general care, the prevention
and treatment of disease and the assurance of freedom from harassment, and
unnecessary discomfort and pain."
The use of animals as experimental subjects in the 20th century has contributed to
many important advances in scientific and medical knowledge (Leader and Stark
1987). Although scientists have also developed non―animal models for research
(e.g. cell culture), these models often cannot completely mimic the complex human
or animal body. Continued progress in human and animal health and well-being
requires the use of living animals. Nevertheless, efforts to develop and use
scientifically valid alternatives, adjuncts, and refinements to animal research should
continue.
The Five Freedoms. The concept of Five Freedoms originated with the Report of
the Technical Committee to Enquire into the Welfare of Animals kept under Intensive
Livestock Husbandry Systems, the Brambell Report, December 1965 (HMSO
London, ISBN 0 10 850286 4). This stated that farm animals should have freedom
“to stand up, lie down, turn around, groom themselves and stretch their limbs,” a list
that is still sometimes referred to as Brambell’s Five Freedoms.
As a direct result of the Brambell Report, the Farm Animal Welfare Advisory
Committee (FAWAC) was set up. This was disbanded at the same time that the
Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC) was established by the British Government in
July 1979, with some common membership. One of these bodies started to list the
provisions that should be made for farm animals in five categories, which also
became known as the Five Freedoms (despite the fact that not all the categories
were actually freedoms). Records from FAWC are not readily available so the exact
origin is not clear. The concept was subsequently refined by FAWC so that it actually
took the form of five freedoms. It has since been further updated and is now the most
visited page on the Council's Website.” The five (5) freedoms are the following:
(1) Freedom from Hunger and Thirst; (2) Freedom from Discomfort; (3) Freedom
from Pain, Injury or Disease - by prevention or rapid diagnosis and treatment; (4)
Freedom to Express Normal Behavior; and (5) Freedom from Fear and Distress.
Freedom from Hunger and Thirst. This means that the mice should have ready
access to fresh water and a diet to maintain full health and vigor. On this one, I
guess there was no violation in the conduct of the experiment (Vitamin C Deficiency
Fails to Protect Mice from Malaria) as the mice were given fresh water and food.
1

2. Freedom from Discomfort. This means the provision of an appropriate
environment including shelter and a comfortable resting area. In my opinion, there
was also no violation on this one with regards to the experiment that was done.
Included in this freedom are such things as replacement of cages once a week and
replacement of water once or twice a week.
Freedom from Pain, Injury or Disease. This is described as the prevention or rapid
diagnosis and treatment. In the experiment, the mice themselves were injected with
a lethal dose of Plasmodium berghei NK65-infected red blood cells, which are known
to cause malaria. This is a clear violation of this specific freedom in this experiment.
From this point, it is clear that the experiment cannot be done without violating this
specific animal freedom.
To improve the experiment, the key idea is just to minimize the casualties. Key
questions to ask would be: (1) Is there are an alternative method to do this one (e.g.
in vitro experiments such as cell culture); (2) Is there a way to minimize the number
of mice involved?; and (3) Was anesthesia (e.g. diethyl ether) used to minimize pain
in the collection of samples from mice?
If the answer to the first question is no, then by no means continue with the mice
experiment. With regard to the second question, it was clear in the experiments that
4 to 6 mice were used at various points of the experiments. In the measuring of
ascorbate concentration, 4 mice with GuloKO gene and also the same number of
C57BL/6J mice were used (for a total of 8 mice). For the testing of RBC, PCV, and
Hb, a total of 18 mice (6 mice each for GuloKOSW, GuloKONW, and C57BL/6J NW)
were used. For the testing of reticulocyte ratio, parasitemia kinetics, and days after
infection, around 12 mice (6 C57BL/6J mice and 6 GuloKO mice) was tested for each
experiment.
Regarding the third question, it was presumed that no anesthesia was used in the
collection of the samples. To minimize pain, anesthesia (e.g. diethyl ether) should be
used. Also, the person who will collect the samples should be an expert to further
minimize the pain to the mice. First timers will definitely inflict more pain.
Freedom to Express Normal Behavior. This relates to the provision of sufficient
space, proper facilities and company of the animal's own kind. In the experiment, the
mice were isolated to observe the effects of the Plasmodium berghei NK65. Again,
this is a clear violation of this freedom. But since this is for research purpose, then
this procedure cannot be done away with.
Freedom from Fear and Distress. This means ensuring conditions and treatment
which avoid mental suffering for mice. By injecting Plasmodium berghei NK65 to the
mice, they were subjected to fear and distress as the result of hormonal imbalances
that occurred within their bodies.
In conclusion, it is clear that is impossible to conduct research on mice without
violating the provisions of the five freedoms. So, maybe animals for research
purposes should exempted from these principles. The key is just to minimize the
pain inflicted to mice, determine the appropriate number for the experiments to obtain
optimal data, and consider alternative methods in conducting research that do not
require mice usage.
2