Explores the use of animals in research and the depth to which humans think they are dependent on animals. Alternatives offered including but not limited to Johns Hopkins Center for Alternatives to Animals in Research

1. This work by Valerie Lang Waldin, J.D., M.L.S. is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution
4.0
International License.

2. …of what we pay for animals in
experimentation.

3. It's estimated that the National Institutes of
Health (NIH) spends some $14.5 billion per
year of taxpayer dollars on animal
experimentation.
Source: Animal Legal Defense Fund

4. NIH Spent $140 Million of taxpayer dollars on
Animal Testing In Foreign Countries in 2020
Source: Keller Research Associates

6.  Since animals, unlike
humans, usually
cannot volunteer to
partake in
experiments, when is it
appropriate to subject
animals to activities
which produce pain,
suffering or death?

7.  that supports notion that animals should have a
pain-free life.
◦ The pursuit of science has long been one of the areas
where the interests of animals have been set aside for
the needs of human science.

8. Are different species or sources of animals
more acceptable than others? (Animals
specifically bred for research use versus stray
pets from local government pounds.)

9. If some use of animals is appropriate, then
how do you draw the line between acceptable
and unacceptable?

10.  Are there duties
toward the animals
used in research that
deal with conditions of
housing and care
before experiments?
What level of pain may
be inflicted? What are
the duties toward the
animal after the
experiment?

11. Strict Criteria &
only when
necessary
NO
YES

12.  What is still in dispute is the degree to which,
if at all, it is now necessary to inflict pain and
suffering on animals in order to support the
orderly advance of scientific information.

13.  Should science be exempt from the general
animal protection laws known as the anti-
cruelty laws?

14.  Issue first arose in Great Britain
 National Anti-Vivisection Society formed in
1875
 First big animal cruelty law in NY 1867
exempted scientific research

15.  Medical and veterinary investigations and
training
 Drug testing
 Cosmetic testing
 Consumer products
 Educational programs
 Annually 100,000,000 - 115,000,000
animals in U.S.

18.  Training tools for doctors and veterinarians
◦ E.g., inserting a catheter, administering anesthesia,
performing operations ◦
◦ Test subjects on vaccines, drugs, and other products
◦ So you have a spectrum of passionate belief.
◦ And countries differ widely.

20.  United States (2019)1,2
• Almost 1 million animals are held captive in
laboratories or used in experiments (excluding
rats, mice, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and
agricultural animals used in agricultural
experiments), plus an estimated 100 million
mice and rats
• Source: 1Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, “Annual Report Animal Usage by Fiscal
Year: Total Number of Animals Research Facilities Used in
Regulated Activities (Column B)” and “Annual Report Animal Usage
by Fiscal Year: Total Number of Animals Research Facilities used
in Regulated Activities (Column F),” 27 Apr. 2021.
2Madhusree Mukerjee, “Speaking for the Animals: A Veterinarian
Analyzes the Turf Battles That Have Transformed the Animal
Laboratory,” Scientific American, Aug. 2004.

21. • 5.07 million animals used in experiments
• 94,543 animals subjected to “severe pain
near, at, or above the pain tolerance
threshold of unanesthetized conscious
animals”
• Source: 3Canadian Council on Animal Care,“CCAC
2020 Animal Data Report,” 2021

22. • 3.06 million procedures on animals
• Of the 1.9 million experiments completed,
149,917 were assessed as “severe,” including
“long-term disease processes where
assistance with normal activities such as
feeding and drinking are required or where
significant deficits in behaviours/activities
persist.”
• Source: 4 U.K. Government, “Annual Statistics of Scientific
Procedures on Living Animals, Great Britain 2021,” Home
Office, 30 June 2022.

35.  First tests – rats, up to one month
 1957 – drug testing on dogs and rats for up
to 6 months
 1960s – testing on pregnant animals
 1980s – testing on rats and dogs for up to 18
months

36. Pepper

37.  Pepper's journey in the summer of 1965
helped start a national media sensation and a
broad panic over the theft of pets for
biomedical research.
 Her death on an operating table in the Bronx
would help animal welfare advocates break a
long-standing stalemate in Congress and
push through the most significant animal-
protection bill in American history.

40. Trailblazer, icon
Groundbreaking book
description
 Today, as never before, we are subjecting
animals to scientific experimentation, wearing
furs and leather goods, and eating
commercially produced meats - casually
accepting slaughter as a necessary way of life,
and carefully ignoring the inhumanity and illogic
of our behavior. There are extensive federally
financed programs in which animals are
poisoned, starved and tortured, although many
authorities now say the experiments are not
worth doing and yield results not worth
publishing.
 Singer describes this cruelty we impose upon
other animals with logic and restraint. He
shows how, whenever we start to become
aware of our practices, we marshal a host of
rationalizations to defend them. Singer peers
behind the scenes and exposes the
collaboration between politicians and those
special interest groups who speak for the users
and suppliers of laboratory animals.


44. https://www.peta.org/issues/animals-
used-for-experimentation/silver-
spring-monkeys/

45.  Inside Biosearch (approx. 13 minutes)

51. See separate PowerPoint.

53. Click HERE for a timeline of the history of
advocating for chimpanzees used in research.

54.  Each passing decade in the US gives more
weight to the interests of the animals,
without changing the public’s core interest in
the advancement of science.
◦ This evolution at the federal level can be seen in the
increasingly detailed focus of the federal Animal
Welfare Act on the actions of science.

55.  From USDA Animal Welfare Reports
◦ Total animals reported used in research (excluding
rats, mice and birds):
 • 1985 – 2,153,787 at 1,105 reporting facilities
 • 1999 – 1,217,998 at 1,232 reporting facilities
 • 2001 – 705,602 at 1,216 reporting facilities

56.  Rats and mice
represent
approximately 90
percent of the animals
used in research. They
are not included in the
above numbers
because facilities are
not required to report
on them.

57. Why?

58.  Most institutions have Animal Care
Committees in place that require anyone
undertaking scientific research where animals
are involved to first justify their proposal by
full presentation to the Committee.
 Housing of animals before and after
experiments raises as many—if not more—
issues than the experiments themselves.
 Increased cost of keeping animals

59. The USDA itself has become a focus point for
finding alternatives to the use of animals in
research.

60.  Roach produced and
sold an antiserum from
the blood of rabbits,
goats, and sheep.
◦ Antiserum production
involves injection into a
live animal followed by
extraction of blood.

61.  Complaint filed by the Administrator of APHIS
(USDA’s Animal & Plant Health Inspection
Service)
 Alleged that Roach operated as a dealer
without being licensed
 Operated a research facility without being
registered
 Refused to allow APHIS to inspect the records
and facilities of Roach Laboratories

62. Long stretch
 Roach argued he was not
a dealer and therefore
did not require a dealer’s
license.
◦ He tried to make the
argument that there is a
difference between selling
serum and antiserum and
that he only tested blood
from individual animals
instead of a pool of
animals.

63. Roach also said he
did not obtain the
rabbits from a dealer
in commerce .
For these procedures,
Roach bought 198
rabbits from Shelton’s
Bunny Barn, which is a
licensed dealer under
the AWA.

64. Roach said that
he was not is not a
“research facility”
as defined by the
Animal Welfare Act
and therefore was
not required to be
registered with the
USDA.

65. That’s all the law says.
 7 U.S.C. § 2132 (e) The term
“research facility” means any
school (except an elementary or
secondary school), institution,
organization, or person that
uses or intends to use live
animals in research, tests, or
experiments, and that (1)
purchases or transports live
animals in commerce, or (2)
receives funds under a grant,
award, loan, or contract from a
department, agency, or
instrumentality of the United
States for the purpose of
carrying out research, tests, or
experiments.

66.  Roach was a dealer and
should be licensed as
such.
 Roach was a research
facility and should be
registered as such.
 Roach should allow
inspections of the
facilities as required by
the AWA.

68. Dog Space and Exercise

69. Housing for Primates

70. This is the cage size which satisfies the
regulations for great apes.

71. Primates

Dealers, exhibitors, and research
facilities must develop, document,
and follow an appropriate plan for
environment enhancement adequate
to promote the psychological well-
being of nonhuman primates.
The plan must be in accordance
with the currently accepted
professional standards as cited in
appropriate professional journals or
reference guides, and as directed by
the attending veterinarian. This plan
must be made available to APHIS
upon request, and, in the case of
research facilities, to officials of any
pertinent funding agency.

72.  Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Glickman, 2000

73.  When ALDF discovered a chimpanzee named
Barney in a U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)-
licensed roadside zoo, he was languishing in
solitary confinement on the cement floor of a cage.
Deprived of companionship and veterinary care, he
suffered from severe psychological and physical
distress until he escaped from his cage and was
shot and killed by a zoo employee. On behalf of
Mark Jurnove, a frequent zoo visitor disturbed by
the isolation and neglect that marked Barney’s
daily life, ALDF sued the USDA for failing to set
standards to protect primates under the federal
Animal Welfare Act (AWA).

74.  In October 1996, a U.S. District Court Judge found the USDA
in violation of the AWA and ordered the agency to develop
stricter standards, emphasizing the need to address the
psychological well-being of primates in captivity. U.S. District
Court Judge Charles Richey called the USDA’s failure to issue
such standards. "egregious." "This case involves an abject
failure in the rulemaking process…to enforce the AWA," he
stated.

75.  While the Court of Appeals later held that the "standards" set
by the USDA were already adequate, they upheld the decision
that Jurnove did have legal standing to sue to protect the
interests of animals under the AWA. This decision established
that animal activists have standing to sue under the Animal
Welfare Act and has been cited frequently in subsequent
litigation promoting humane treatment of animals.

76. Barney

77. Final Report On Environment Enhancement To
Promote The Psychological Well-being Of
Nonhuman Primates
U. S. Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service
Animal Care, Riverdale, MD
July 15, 1999
What follows is a summary of issues
raised in both the mail survey and
telephone interviews of APHIS Animal
Care employees…

78.  Minimum Criteria Needs Clarification
 Lack of Enforceability
 Minimalistic and One-Sided Enhancement
Programs
 Questionable Implementation of the Facility
Plans
 Low Levels of Appropriate Social Grouping
 Practices that Perpetuate Abnormal Behavior
 Poorly Furnished Environments

79.  The standards in 9 CFR §3.81
emphasize the presence of a physical
document called an “environment
enhancement plan for primates” at each
facility, but the standards contain few
solid criteria on which an inspector can
judge the content of the plan as “in
compliance” or “out of compliance.” The
regulations state that the plan must
address social grouping, enrichment of
the physical environment, special
considerations, and restraint devices,
but what is required in order to address
these in a minimally compliant manner
is unclear. Some inspectors said they
had the impression that the only legally
necessary condition for compliance was
the existence of the document itself,
regardless of its contents.

80.  Some inspectors said they could recognize a
plan that was not in accordance with
professional literature or was not “adequate
to promote psychological well-being.” i.e.,
the inspectors said if it’s bad, they can tell.
◦ However, they had concerns about Agency support
for particular interpretations or judgement because
of the vague language and nature of the
performance standard.

81.  Many employees supported the idea that
enhancement programs be required to
address several different aspects of a
primate’s environment and behavior, beyond
the superficial breakdown.
◦ E.g., feeding of treats or provision with a simple
rubber toy, in an otherwise barren, stimulus-poor
environment

82. Animal Care inspectors recommended facilities
be required to provide better documentation of
implementation.

83.  Some Animal Care
inspectors felt that
there were too many
singly housed
primates.
◦ All of these reasons
reflect convenience for
the owner(s), not primary
consideration for the
psychological needs of
the animals.

84.  Animal Care inspectors
were concerned that dealers
involved in the pet trade
continue to remove infants
from their care-giving
parent(s) at an
inappropriately early age,
for reasons other than
medical necessity.
◦ These practices are known to
produce socially incompetent
adults and contribute to the
low levels of social grouping
already identified.

85. 7. Poorly Furnished Environments

86.  In conjunction with the release of this report, a
policy was proposed and published, Animal
and Plant Health Inspection Service, Draft
Policy on Environment Enhancement for
Nonhuman Primates, Federal Register: July 15,
1999 (Volume 64, Number 135) page 38145-
38150 [Proposed Rules] [Docket No. 98-121-
1]. But this was a policy for “guidance” not
proposed new regulations, and has yet to be
finalized into a formal policy of the agency.

87. The primary statutory responsibility of the
committee is to engage in inspections of
the research facility at least twice a year.

88.  (A) At least one member shall be a doctor of
veterinary medicine
 (B) At least one member
◦ Shall not be affiliated in any way with such facility
other than as a member of the Committee
◦ Shall not be a member of the immediate family of
a person who is affiliated with such facility
◦ Is intended to provide representation for general
community interests in the proper care and
treatment of animals

89. Association for Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal
Care
AAALAC endorses the use of animals to advance medicine and science
when there are no non-animal alternatives, and when it is done in an
ethical and humane way.

90. Today 21 states (Arizona, California, Connecticut, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts,
Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island,
Texas, Vermont, and Virginia) and Washington, DC, have state laws or policies giving K-12 students the right to
opt for an alternative instead of participating in animal dissection.
https://aavs.org/animals-
science/laws/student-choice-laws/

92. Students often learn through clinical experience in which they have the
opportunity to observe and assist experienced veterinarians in treating
animals who have legitimate medical problems and will benefit from the
treatment. Some institutions, such as Ohio State University’s veterinary
school, have even developed relationships with nearby animal shelters,
allowing students to meet the veterinary needs of the facility’s animals as
well as assist with spay-and-neuter services.

93. The Animal Welfare Act
Next