Transparency and solid decisions - improving the ethical evaluation of research involving animals

What are the flaws of the ethical review process, and what can be done about them?Animals used for research, quality control and safety evaluation, are of obvious social importance. However, their use is controversial.

Since 1989, all animal research in Sweden is therefore evaluated by an ethical committee which weighs the benefit of the research against the harm to the animals. However, the assignment is complex and often criticized for lacking ethical discussion and legal security.

In a recently published pilot study we report that legal requirements of the ethical weighing and the 3Rs are not fulfilled and that there is a discrepancy between EU and Swedish legislation and between the demands set by legislation and by the application form.

This evokes concerns.To facilitate and improve the decision making process in the AECs, we therefore plan to: 1) analyze how the task of the ethical committees is defined by Swedish and European governmental bills and legislation; 2) send out questionnaires to researchers, committee members and other core actors, as well as attend committee meetings to assess the procedure; 3) develop a model for ethical decision-making that ensures a proper HBA is performed, the 3Rs duly considered and the legal certainty of the AECs safeguarded.

The ethical review process is an exercise of public authority and must guarantee that animal research is built on adequate animal welfare and sound science.