An Opportunity to Refocus on the ‘Humane’ in Experimental Endpoints: Moving beyond Directive 2010/63/EU

Abstract

Humane endpoints are a core refinement concept in animal experimentation. This paper identifies an urgent requirement for individuals and institutions to refocus on humane endpoints as part of the transposition of Directive 2010/63/EU into the national laws of the Member States, and to go beyond their legal construction when setting new guidance or applying humane endpoints in practice. It will be argued that requirements for humane endpoints within the Directive appear not to promote recent advances in best practice, but seem reliant on a narrow and potentially outdated definition of the term. We describe progress that has been made in encouraging change in the construction and application of humane endpoints, and suggest that Directive 2010/63/EU does not sufficiently acknowledge the conceptual complexity of this refinement strategy. For example, a useful development representing recent consensual views of best practice has been proposed by an EU consortium (in 2012). A complex approach to humane endpoints may place additional demands on institutions and raise challenges that would, unfortunately, not need to be overcome in order to remain within the Directive's current requirements regarding humane endpoints. We argue that there is now a need for a practical tool to help structure appropriate ethical reflection during research planning and experimentation, in order to facilitate best practice in the application of this important refinement concept.

Keywords

Directive 2010/63/EU ethical reflection experimental animals humane endpoint refinement Three Rs

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Blakemore

, MacArthur Clark

, Nevalainen

, Oberdorfer

, & Sussman

(2012). Implementing the 3Rs in neuroscience research: A reasoned approach. Neuron 75, 948–950.

Anon. (2010). 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. Official Journal of the European Union L276, 20.10.2010, 33–79.

Hendriksen

, Morton

, & Cussler

(2011). Use of humane endpoints to minimise suffering. In The Cost Manual of Laboratory Animal Care and Use (ed. Howard

, Nevalainen

, & Perretta

), pp. 333–353. Boca Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press.

Hendriksen

C.F.M.

, & Morton

D.B.

(ed.) (1999). Humane Endpoints in Animal Experiments for Biomedical Research. Proceedings of the International Conference, 22–25 November 1998, Zeist, The Netherlands, 150 pp. London, UK: Royal Society of Medicine Press.

CCAC (1998). Guidelines on: Choosing an Appropriate Endpoint in Experiments Using Animals for Research, Teaching and Testing, 30 pp. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Canadian Council on Animal Care). Available at: http://www.ccac.ca/Documents/Standards/Guidelines/Appropriate_endpoint.pdf (Accessed 02.09.13).

OECD (2000). OECD Environmental Health and Safety Publications Series on Testing and Assessment No. 19: Guidance Document on the Recognition, Assessment and Use of Clinical Signs as Humane Endpoints for Experimental Animals Used in Safety Evaluation, 39 pp. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Available at: http://search.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?cote=ENV/JM/MONO(2000)7&docLanguage=En (Accessed 02.09.13).

Franco

N.H.

, Correia-Neves

, & Olsson

I.A.S.

(2012). How “humane” is your endpoint? Refining the science-driven approach for termination of animal studies of chronic infection. PLoS Pathology 8, e1002399.

Anon. (1986). Council Directive of 24 November 1986 on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States regarding the protection of animals used for experimental and other scientific purposes (86/609/EEC). Official Journal of the European Communities L358, 18.12.1986, 1–28.

Balls

(1998). The biomedical sciences and the need for less-inhumane animal procedures. In Humane Endpoints in Animal Experiments for Biomedical Research. Proceedings of the International Conference, 22–25 November 1998, Zeist, The Netherlands, pp. 1–4. London, UK: Royal Society of Medicine Press.

10.

Russell

W.M.S.

, & Burch

R.L.

(1959). The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique, 238 pp. London, UK: Methuen.

11.

Morton

D.M.

(1999). Humane endpoints in animal experiments for biomedical research: Ethical, legal and practical aspects. In Humane Endpoints in Animal Experiments for Biomedical Research. Proceedings of the International Conference, 22–25 November 1998, Zeist, The Netherlands, pp. 5–12. London, UK: Royal Society of Medicine Press.

12.

Olfert

E.D.

, & Godson

(2000). Humane endpoints for infectious disease animal models. ILAR Journal 41, 99–104.

13.

Toth

L.A.

(2000). Defining the moribund condition as an experimental endpoint for animal research. ILAR Journal 41, 72–79.

14.

Krug

, Hausleitner

, Taddey

, Volkers

, Kobe

, & Cussler

(2005). Serological test methods as replacement for infection trials in piglets to test the potency of E. coli vaccines for sows (dams). ALTEX 22, 111–116. [Article in German.]

15.

Lindl

, Gross

, Ruhdel

, von Aulock

, & Volkel

(2012). Guidance on determining indis-pensibility and balancing potential benefits of animal experiments with costs to the animals with specific consideration of EU Directive 2010/63/EU. ALTEX 29, 219–228.

16.

Mepham

(1996). Ethical analysis of food biotechnologies: An evaluative framework. In Food Ethics (ed. Mepham

), pp. 101–119. London, UK: Rout-ledge. Reproduced in: Chadwick, R. & Schroeder, D. (ed.) (2002). Applied Ethics: Critical Concepts in Philosophy, pp. 343-359. London, UK: Routledge.

17.

England

, & Millar

(2008). The ethics and role of AI with fresh and frozen semen in dogs. Reproduction in Domestic Animals 43, Suppl. 2, 165–171.

18.

Millar

(2011). Ethics and ethical analysis in veterinary science: The development and application of the ethical matrix method. In Veterinary and Animal Ethics (ed. Wathes

C.M.

, Corr

S.A.

, May

S.A.

, McCulloch

S.P.

, & Whiting

M.C.

), pp. 100–112. Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.