Dogs for Life: Beagles, Drugs, and Capital in the Twentieth Century

Bolman, Brad

doi:10.1007/s10739-021-09649-2

Cited by 9 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The proportion of Beagles in our literature sample was less than we expected and less than several authors have claimed [ 10 ]. A reason could be that some studies focus on conditions that occur naturally in specific breeds, such as diseases related to brachycephaly.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 67%

“…It has been stated that the most suitable and frequently utilized breed in clinical trials is the Beagle. These dogs are commonly kept in kennels in homogenous groups based on age, weight, sex, and neuter status in the research facilities of universities or pharmaceutical companies [ 10 ]. Beagles are medium-sized and have a short coat and an even temperament, which makes them particularly suitable for medical research in contrast to other breeds [ 11 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What Kinds of Dogs Are Used in Clinical and Experimental Research?

Schulte

Arlt

2022

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Dogs are widely used in research to answer questions about canine or human conditions. For the latter, research dogs are often used as models, since they are physiologically more similar to humans than other species used in research and they share similar environmental conditions. From a veterinary perspective, research findings are widely based on academic research, and thus are generated under experimental conditions. In that regard, the question arises: do the dogs used for research adequately represent the dog population seen in veterinary practice? It may, for example, be assumed that Beagle dogs are often used as experimental animals. The objective of this study was to evaluate the signalment of dogs used in veterinary research. Furthermore, we aimed to assess other relevant criteria regarding the validity of clinical trials in the context of six different veterinary medicine specialties: cardiology, internal medicine, neurology, orthopaedics, reproduction, and surgery. Methods: A literature search was conducted and 25 studies per specialty were randomly selected. The breed, sex, neuter status, median age, and median weight of the dogs used for clinical studies (n = 150) published between 2007 and 2019 were evaluated. Results: In total, 596,542 dogs were used in the 150 trials. Breed information was given for 33,835 of these dogs (5.7%). Of the latter, 1.9% were Beagles. Nine clinical trials exclusively used Beagles. The most frequently used breeds were German Shepherds (7.3%), Labrador Retrievers (6.7%), and Golden Retrievers (4.7%). The major reporting deficits found were missing breed specification in 25.3% of the articles; missing information about the sex of the dogs in 16.2%; missing age and weight information in 22.7 and 32.7%, respectively; and missing neuter status in 38.7% of the clinical studies. The median sample size was 56 (Q1:29; Q3:365) dogs. Conclusions: The presented project revealed that Beagle dogs represent only a small proportion of dogs in veterinary research. Based on the evaluated publications, it seems that some relevant dog attributes differ between the specialties. The results, however, show deficits in the reporting of demographic data for the dogs. The need for an improvement in the documentation and/or reporting of animal signalment is obvious and should be addressed by authors, reviewers, and journal editors in the future.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 67%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Kinds of Dogs Are Used in Clinical and Experimental Research?

Schulte

Arlt

2022

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The outcome, which saw the Laboratory Animal Welfare Act (1966) include monkeys, guinea pigs, hamsters, and rabbits, as well as cats and dogs, although provisions differed across these species, was a political compromise balancing humane concern against economic and practical considerations (see US House, 1966c). While we have not explicitly made the argument here, we do suggest that this wider context may have encouraged the development of purpose bred laboratory dogs (for the latter, see Bolman, 2021).…”

Section: The New Humanitarianism and The Laboratory Animal Welfare Actmentioning

confidence: 95%

“Havens of mercy”: health, medical research, and the governance of the movement of dogs in twentieth-century America

Kirk

Ramsden

2021

HPLS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article argues that the movement of dogs from pounds to medical laboratories played a critically important role in debates over the use of animals in science and medicine in the United States in the twentieth century, not least by drawing the scientific community into every greater engagement with bureaucratic political governance. If we are to understand the unique characteristics of the American federal legislation that emerges in the 1960s, we need to understand the long and protracted debate over the use of pound animals at the local municipal and state level between antivivisectionists, humane activists, and scientific and medical researchers. We argue that the Laboratory Animal Care Act of 1966 reflects the slow evolution of a strategy that proved most successful in local conflicts, and which would characterize a “new humanitarianism”: not the regulation of experimental practices but of the care and transportation of the animals being provided to the laboratory. Our analysis is consistent with, and draws upon, scholarship which has established the productive power of public agencies and civil society on the periphery of the American state.

show abstract

“…The biomedical venture of nonhuman primates has been labelled “extractive colonialism and neo-colonialism” (Haraway 1989 , p. 115) and “racialized political economies” (Suri 2022 , p. 117). Furthermore, the “escalating role of corporate power,” to cite Bolman ( 2022 , p. 149), in laboratory animal supply in general from the 1950s and onwards also played into this context, bringing new actors into the mix. By studying the making of beagle dogs into a “global toxicological standard” (p. 148), Bolman demonstrates the central role of corporate actors in “producing (breeding) laboratory organisms as commodities (‘biocapital’) and shaping their international networks of circulation and exchange” (p. 149).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Nonhuman Primates in Public Health: Between Biological Standardization, Conservation and Care

Druglitrø

2023

J Hist Biol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

By the mid-1960s, nonhuman primates had become key experimental organisms for vaccine development and testing, and was seen by many scientists as important for the future success of this field as well as other biomedical undertakings. A major hindrance to expanding the use of nonhuman primates was the dependency on wild-captured animals. In addition to unreliable access and poor animal health, procurement of wild primates involved the circulation of infectious diseases and thus also public health hazards. This paper traces how the World Health Organization (WHO) became involved in the issue of primate supply, and shows how by the late 1960s concerns for vaccine development and the conservation of wildlife began to converge. How did the WHO navigate public health and animal health? What characterized the response and with what implications for humans and animals? The paper explores how technical standards of care were central to managing the conflicting concerns of animal and human health, biological standardization, and conservation. While the WHO’s main aim was to prevent public health risks, I argue that imposing new standards of care implied establishing new hierarchies of humans and animals, and cultures of care.

show abstract

Dogs for Life: Beagles, Drugs, and Capital in the Twentieth Century

Cited by 9 publications

References 64 publications

What Kinds of Dogs Are Used in Clinical and Experimental Research?

What Kinds of Dogs Are Used in Clinical and Experimental Research?

“Havens of mercy”: health, medical research, and the governance of the movement of dogs in twentieth-century America

Nonhuman Primates in Public Health: Between Biological Standardization, Conservation and Care

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About