The 3Rs and Humane Experimental Technique: Implementing Change
Abstract
:Simple Summary
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. The Genesis of the Three Rs
- We should never have recourse to experiment in cases which observation can afford us the information required.
- No experiment should be performed without a distinct and definite object and without the persuasion, after the maturest consideration, that the object will be attained and produce a real and uncomplicated result.
- We should not needlessly repeat experiments.
- That it should be instituted with the least possible infliction of suffering.
- Every physiological experiment should be performed under such circumstances as will secure due observation and attestation of its results, and so obviate, as much as possible, the necessity for its repetition.
… till it is sufficiently clear that the fact pursued neither is, nor can be proved by any other evidence which is within reach, nor by any more mode of enquiry [17].
3. The Adoption and Spread of the Three Rs
“Replies to a questionnaire recently issued by UFAW to the most eminent experimental biologists in Britain showed an overwhelming consensus of opinion in favour of the control of experiments as exercised in this country by the Home Office. By ensuring a high standard of moral responsibility in dealing with all species of vertebrates the Home Office also protects scientists from unjust allegations of cruelty” [31].
“The principles of the Three Rs—Replacement, Reduction and Refinement—should be incorporated into the design and conduct of scientific and/or educational activities that involve animals.”
4. The Future
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Russell, W.M.S.; Burch, R.L. The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique; Methuen & Co Ltd.: London, UK, 1959. [Google Scholar]
- Mähler, M.; Berard, M.; Feinstein, R.; Gallagher, A.; Illgen-Wilcke, B.; Pritchett-Corning, K.; Raspa, M. FELASA recommendations for the health monitoring of mouse, rat, hamster, guinea pig and rabbit colonies in breeding and experimental units. Lab. Anim. 2014, 48, 178–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nuffield Council on Bioethics. The Ethics of Research Involving Animals; Latimer Trend & Company Ltd.: London, UK, 2005; p. 335. [Google Scholar]
- Poole, T. Welfare considerations with regard to transgenic animals. Anim. Welf. 1995, 4, 81–85. [Google Scholar]
- Jegstrup, I.; Thon, R.; Hansen, A.K.; Hoitinga, M.R. Characterization of transgenic mice—A comparison of protocols for welfare evaluation and phenotype characterization of mice with a suggestion on a future certificate of instruction. Lab. Anim. 2003, 37, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Thon, R.W.; Ritskes-Hoitinga, M.; Gates, H.; Prins, J.B. Phenotyping of Genetically Modified Mice. In The UFAW Handbook on the Care and Management of Laboratory and Other Research Animals; Hubrecht, R., Kirkwood, J., Eds.; John Wiley & Sons: Chichester, UK, 2010; pp. 61–75. [Google Scholar]
- National Research Council. Recognition and Alleviation of Distress in Laboratory Animals; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2008; 122p, p. 122. [Google Scholar]
- Wells, D.J.; Playle, L.C.; Enser, W.E.J.; Flecknell, P.A.; Gardiner, M.A.; Holland, J.; Howard, B.R.; Hubrecht, R.; Humphreys, K.R.; Jackson, I.J. Assessing the welfare of genetically altered mice. Lab. Anim. 2006, 40, 111–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Joint Working Group on Refinement. Refinement and reduction in production of genetically modified mice: Sixth Report of the BVAAWF/FRAME/RSPCA/UFAW Joint Working Group on Refinement. Lab. Anim. 2003, 37 (Suppl. 1), S1–S51. [Google Scholar]
- Hubrecht, R. Genetically modified animals, welfare and UK legislation. Anim. Welf. 1995, 4, 163–170. [Google Scholar]
- Buehr, M.; Hjorth, J.P.; Hansen, A.K.; Sandøe, P. Genetically modified laboratory animals-what welfare problems do they face? J. Appl. Anim. Welf. Sci. 2003, 6, 319–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buchanan-Smith, H.M.; Rennie, A.E.; Vitale, A.; Pollo, S.; Prescott, M.J.; Morton, D.B. Harmonising the definition of refinement. Anim. Welf. 2005, 14, 379–384. [Google Scholar]
- Richmond, J. The Three Rs: A journey or a destination? ATLA 2000, 28, 761–773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Richmond, J. The Three Rs. In The UFAW Handbook on the Care and Management of Laboratory and Other Research Animals, 8th ed.; Hubrecht, R., Kirkwood, J., Eds.; Wiley-Blackwell: Oxford, UK, 2010; pp. 5–22. [Google Scholar]
- Hall, M. A Critical and Experimental Essay on the Circulation of the Blood: Especially as Observed in the Minute and Capillary Vessels of the Batrachia and of the Fishes; R.B. Seeley and W. Burnside: London, UK, 1831; xviii; 187p. [Google Scholar]
- Hall, M. On experiments in physiology as a question of medical ethics. Lancet 1847, 1847, 58–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anonymous. Editorial. London Medical Gazette, 24 May 1839; 212–215. [Google Scholar]
- Hume, C.W. Law and Practice: The rights of laboratory animals. In The UFAW Handbook on The Care and Management of Laboratory Animals; Worden, A., Ed.; Baillière, Tindall and Cox: Covent Garden, London, UK, 1947; pp. 1–20. [Google Scholar]
- Worden, A. The UFAW Handbook on the Care and Management of Laboratory Animals; Baillière, Tindall and Cox: London, UK, 1947. [Google Scholar]
- Hume, C.W. The ethics of experiments on animals. Nature 1951, 167, 213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hume, C.W. Man and Beast; UFAW: South Mimms, Potters Bar, UK, 1949. [Google Scholar]
- Lapage, G. Welfare of animals in the laboratory. Nature 1950, 165, 885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Burch, R.L. The progress of humane experimental technique since 1959: A personal view. ATLA 1995, 23, 776–783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Russell, W.M.S. The development of the Three Rs concept. ATLA 1995, 23, 298–304. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Balls, M. The origins and early days of the Three Rs concept. ATLA 2009, 37, 255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Russell, W.M.S. Speech at the Awards Luncheon. In The World Congress on Alternatives and Animal Use in the Life Sciences: Education, Research, Testing; Goldberg, A.M., van Zutphen, L.F.M., Principe, M.L., Eds.; Mary Ann Liebert: New York, NY, USA, 1955; pp. 71–80. [Google Scholar]
- Russell, W.M.S. The increase of humanity in experimentation: Replacement, reduction and refinement. Lab. Anim. Bur. Collect. Pap. 1957, 6, 23–25. [Google Scholar]
- Russell, W.M.S. The Three Rs: Past, present and future. Anim. Welf. 2005, 14, 279–286. [Google Scholar]
- Stephens, M.L.; Goldberg, A.M.; Rowan, A.N. The first forty years of the alternatives approach: Refining, reducing, and replacing the use of laboratory animals. In The State of the Animals 2001; Salem, D.J., Rowan, A.N., Eds.; Humane Society Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2001; pp. 121–135. [Google Scholar]
- Chance, M.R.A. The contribution of environment to uniformity: Variance control, refinement in pharmacology. Lab. Anim. Bur. Collect. Pap. 1957, 6, 59–73. [Google Scholar]
- UFAW. Minutes of a Meeting of the Executive Committee held at Lambs Conduit Passage, W.C.1 Immediately Following the Meeting of the Directors on February 10th 1961; UFAW: Potters Bar, UK, 1961. [Google Scholar]
- European Parliament and Council. Directive 2010/63/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2010 on the Protection of Animals Used for Scientific Purposes. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1567099172556&uri=CELEX:32010L0063 (accessed on 29 August 2019).
- European Commission. Horizon 2020. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en (accessed on 30 September 2019).
- National Institutes of Health. ARENA/OLAW Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee Guidebook, 2nd ed.; Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare, National Institutes of Health: Bethesda, MD, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Bayne, K.; France, M.P.; Morris, T.H. Legislation and oversight of the conduct of research using animals: A global overview. In The UFAW Handbook on the Care and Management of Laboratory and Other Research Animals, 9th ed.; Hubrecht, R., Golledge, H., Eds., Eds.; Wiley-Blackwell: Oxford, UK, (In prep.).
- National Health and Medical Research Council. Australian Code for the Care and Use of Animals for Scientific Purposes, 8th ed.; National Health and Medical Research Council: Canberra, ACT, Australia, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Guillén, J.; Vergara, P. Laboratory Animals: Regulations and Recommendations for the Care and Use of Animals in Research, 2nd ed.; Guillén, J., Ed.; Academic Press: London, UK, 2017; p. 466. [Google Scholar]
- Council for International Organization of Medical Sciences; The International Council for Laboratory Animal Science. International Guiding Principles for Biomedical Research Involving Animals. Available online: http://iclas.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/CIOMS-ICLAS-Principles-Final1.pdf (accessed on 4 September 2019).
- Hubrecht, R. The Welfare of Animals Used in Research: Practice and Ethics; John Wiley & Sons: Oxford, UK, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Würbel, H.; Garner, J.P. NC3Rs #9 Refinement of Rodent Research through Environmental Enrichment and Systematic Randomization. Available online: https://www.nc3rs.org.uk/sites/default/files/documents/Refinementenvironmentalenrichmentandsystematicrandomization.pdf (accessed on 27 August 2019).
- Hurst, J.L.; West, R.S. Taming anxiety in laboratory mice. Nat. Methods 2010, 7, 825–826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gaskill, B.N.; Rohr, S.A.; Pajor, E.A.; Lucas, J.R.; Garner, J.P. Some like it hot: Mouse temperature preferences in laboratory housing. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2009, 116, 279–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gaskill, B.N.; Rohr, S.A.; Pajor, E.A.; Lucas, J.R.; Garner, J.P. Working with what you’ve got: Changes in thermal preference and behavior in mice with or without nesting material. J. Therm. Biol. 2011, 36, 193–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gaskill, B.N.; Gordon, C.J.; Pajor, E.A.; Lucas, J.R.; Davis, J.K.; Garner, J.P. Heat or Insulation: Behavioral titration of mouse preference for warmth or access to a nest. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e32799. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gaskill, B.N.; Pritchett-Corning, K.R.; Gordon, C.J.; Pajor, E.A.; Lucas, J.R.; Davis, J.K.; Garner, J.P. Energy Reallocation to Breeding Performance through Improved Nest Building in Laboratory Mice. PLoS ONE 2013, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kilkenny, C.; Browne, W.J.; Cuthill, I.C.; Emerson, M.; Altman, D.G. Improving bioscience research reporting: The ARRIVE Guidelines for Reporting Animal Research. PLoS Biol. 2010, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Olsson, I.A.S.; Franco, N.H.; Weary, D.M.; Sandøe, P. The 3Rs Principle—Mind the Ethical Gap! In Proceedings of 8th World Congress on Alternatives and Animal Use in the Life Sciences, Montreal, QC, Canada, 21–25 August 2011; ALTEX Proceedings: Kreuzlingen, Switzerland, 2011; Volume 1, pp. 333–336. [Google Scholar]
- Festing, M.F. Reduction by careful design and statistical analsysis. In The COST Manual of Laboratory Animal Care and Use: Refinement, Reduction, and Research; Festing, B., Nevalainen, T., Perretta, G., Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2011; pp. 131–149. [Google Scholar]
- Honess, P.; Wolfensohn, S. The extended welfare assessment grid: A matrix for the assessment of welfare and cumulative suffering in experimental animals. ATLA 2010, 38, 205–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bateson, M. Cumulative stress in research animals: Telomere attrition as a biomarker in a welfare context? BioEssays 2016, 38, 201–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Smulders, T.V. The Avian Hippocampal Formation and the Stress Response. Brain Behav. Evolut. 2017, 90, 81–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Poirier, C.; Bateson, M.; Gualtieri, F.; Armstrong, E.A.; Laws, G.C.; Boswell, T.; Smulders, T.V. Validation of hippocampal biomarkers of cumulative affective experience. Neurosc. Biobehav. R. 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Flecknell, P. Laboratory Animal Anaesthesia, 4th ed.; Academic Press: London, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Hohlbaum, K.; Bert, B.; Dietze, S.; Palme, R.; Fink, H.; Thöne-Reineke, C. Severity classification of repeated isoflurane anesthesia in C57BL/6JRj mice—Assessing the degree of distress. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0179588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Altholtz, L.Y.; Fowler, K.A.; Badura, L.L.; Kovacs, M.S. Comparison of the stress response in rats to repeated isoflurane or CO2: O2 anesthesia used for restraint during serial blood collection via the jugular vein. J. Am. Assoc. Lab. Anim. Sci. JAALAS 2006, 45, 17–22. [Google Scholar]
- André, V.; Gau, C.; Scheideler, A.; Aguilar-Pimentel, J.A.; Amarie, O.V.; Becker, L.; Garrett, L.; Hans, W.; Hölter, S.M.; Janik, D.; et al. Laboratory mouse housing conditions can be improved using common environmental enrichment without compromising data. PLoS Biol. 2018, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Hubrecht, R.C.; Carter, E. The 3Rs and Humane Experimental Technique: Implementing Change. Animals 2019, 9, 754. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9100754
Hubrecht RC, Carter E. The 3Rs and Humane Experimental Technique: Implementing Change. Animals. 2019; 9(10):754. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9100754
Chicago/Turabian StyleHubrecht, Robert C., and Elizabeth Carter. 2019. "The 3Rs and Humane Experimental Technique: Implementing Change" Animals 9, no. 10: 754. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9100754