The ethical acceptability of animal research is typically evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Legislation such as Directive 2010/63/EU on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes provides guidance for ethical evaluation of animal use proposals but does not dictate the outcome, leaving this determination to the ethical review committees of individual institutions. The authors assess different ethics models and how these are reflected in the guidelines of Directive 2010/63/EU. They also describe a matrix for carrying out harm-benefit analyses of animal use proposals, which they identified by examining the practices of three ethical review committees in the Netherlands. Finally, they discuss how this matrix can be applied by ethical review committees at other institutions.

Recently, a petition was offered to the European Commission calling for an immediate ban on animal testing. Although a Europe-wide moratorium on the use of animals in science is not yet possible, there has been a push by the non-scientific community and politicians for a rapid transition to animal-free innovations. Although there are benefits for both animal welfare and researchers, advances on alternative methods have not progressed enough to be able to replace animal research in the foreseeable future. This trend has led first and foremost to a substantial increase in the administrative burden and hurdles required to make timely advances in research and treatments for human and animal diseases. The current COVID-19 pandemic clearly highlights how much we actually rely on animal research. COVID-19 affects several organs and systems, and the various animal-free alternatives currently available do not come close to this complexity. In this Essay, we therefore argue that the use of animals is essential for the advancement of human and veterinary health.

No abstract

Directive 2010/63/EU was adopted in September 2010 by the European Parliament and Council, and became effective in January 2013. It replaces Directive 86/609/EEC and introduces new requirements for the protection of animals used for scientific purposes. In particular, it requires that establishments that breed, supply or use laboratory animals have a designated veterinarian (DV) with expertise in laboratory animal medicine, or a suitably qualified expert where more appropriate, charged with advisory duties in relation to the well-being and treatment of the animals. This paper is a report of an ESLAV/ECLAM/LAVA/EVERI working group that provides professional guidance on the role and postgraduate training of laboratory animal veterinarians (LAVs), who may be working as DVs under Directive 2010/63/EU. It is also aimed at advising employers, regulators and other persons working under the Directive on the role of the DV. The role and responsibilities of the DV include the development, implementation and continuing review of an adequate programme for veterinary care at establishments breeding and/or using animals for scientific purposes. The programme should be tailored to the needs of the establishment and based on the Directive's requirements, other legislations, and current guidelines in laboratory animal medicine. Postgraduate laboratory animal veterinary training should include a basic task-specific training module for DVs to complement veterinary competences from graduation, and continuing professional development on the basis of a gap analysis. A tiered approach to further training in laboratory animal veterinary medicine and science offers career development pathways that are mutually beneficial to LAVs and establishments.