Search

Public awareness and discussion about animal experiments and replacement methods has greatly increased in recent years. The term 'the Three Rs', which stands for the Replacement, Reduction and Refinement of animal experiments, is inseparably linked in this context. A common goal within the Three Rs scientific community is to develop predictive non-animal models and to better integrate all available data from in vitro , in silico and omics technologies into regulatory decision-making processes regarding, for example, the toxicity of chemicals, drugs or food ingredients. In addition, it is a general concern to implement (human) non-animal methods in basic research. Toward these efforts, there has been an ever-increasing number of Three Rs centres and platforms established over recent years - not only to develop novel methods, but also to disseminate knowledge and help to implement the Three Rs principles in policies and education. The adoption of Directive 2010/63/EU on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes gave a strong impetus to the creation of Three Rs initiatives, in the form of centres and platforms. As the first of a series of papers, this article gives an overview of the European Three Rs centres and platforms, and their historical development. The subsequent articles, to be published over the course of ATLA 's 50th Anniversary year, will summarise the current focus and tasks as well as the future and the plans of the Three Rs centres and platforms. The Three Rs centres and platforms are very important points of contact and play an immense role in their respective countries as 'on the ground' facilitators of Directive 2010/63/EU . They are also invaluable for the widespread dissemination of information and for promoting implementation of the Three Rs in general.

Animal use in biomedical research is generally justified by its potential benefits to the health of humans, or other animals, or the environment. However, ethical acceptability also requires scientists to limit harm to animals in their research. Training in laboratory animal science (LAS) helps scientists to do this by promoting best practice and the 3Rs. This study evaluated scientists' awareness and application of the 3Rs, and their approach to other ethical issues in animal research. It was based on an online survey of participants in LAS courses held in eight venues in four European countries: Portugal (Porto, Braga), Germany (Munich, Heidelberg), Switzerland (Basel, Lausanne, Zurich), and Denmark (Copenhagen). The survey questions were designed to assess general attitudes to animal use in biomedical research, Replacement alternatives, Reduction and Refinement conflicts, and harm-benefit analysis. The survey was conducted twice: immediately before the course ('BC', N = 310) and as a follow-up six months after the course ('AC', N = 127). While courses do appear to raise awareness of the 3Rs, they had no measurable effect on the existing low level of belief that animal experimentation can be fully replaced by non-animal methods. Most researchers acknowledged ethical issues with their work and reported that they discussed these with their peers. The level of an animal's welfare, and especially the prevention of pain, was regarded as the most pressing ethical issue, and as more important than the number of animals used or the use of animals as such. Refinement was considered more feasible than Replacement, as well as more urgent, and was also favoured over Reduction. Respondents in the survey reversed the 'hierarchy' of the 3Rs proposed by their architects, Russell and Burch, prioritizing Refinement over Reduction, and Reduction over Replacement. This ordering may conflict with the expectations of the public and regulators., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

The 3Rs principle of replacement, reduction, and refinement has increasingly been endorsed by legislators and regulatory bodies as the best approach to tackle the ethical dilemma presented by animal experimentation in which the potential benefits for humans stand against the costs borne by the animals. Even when animal use is tightly regulated and supervised, the individual researcher's responsibility is still decisive in the implementation of the 3Rs. Training in laboratory animal science (LAS) aims to raise researchers' awareness and increase their knowledge, but its effect on scientists' attitudes and practice has not so far been systematically assessed. Participants (n = 206) in eight LAS courses (following the Federation of European Laboratory Animal Science Associations category C recommendations) in Portugal were surveyed in a self-administered questionnaire during the course. Questions were related mainly to the 3Rs and their application, attitudes to animal use and the ethical review of animal experiments. One year later, all the respondents were asked to answer a similar questionnaire (57% response rate) with added self-evaluation questions on the impact of training. Our results suggest that the course is effective in promoting awareness and increasing knowledge of the 3Rs, particularly with regard to refinement. However, participation in the course did not change perceptions on the current and future needs for animal use in research.

Refinement measures to improve animal welfare can ease the ethical dilemma between human benefit and animal harm in research with animal models of neurodegenerative diseases. To evaluate the potential for refinement, as well as its implementation in research, we analysed papers on murine models of Huntington's disease (HD) published between 1999 and 2009 (n = 233). Each study was classified according to a four-level severity scale, in terms of the disease stage that animals were allowed to reach, the execution of invasive procedures, and the implementation of refinement. Reports of ethical approval, and regulatory compliance in general, followed a clear rising trend over the years reviewed (p <0.001). However, the proportion of high-severity studies did not change over that period. Also, of the studies for which approval was reported (n = 120), 36% were attributed the highest severity level. The observed discrepancy between the rising motivation to affirm regulatory compliance, and the unaltered proportion of studies allowing animals to reach severely distressful stages, raises both ethical and methodological issues, which we discuss in this paper.

There is growing concern over the welfare of animals used in research, in particular when these animals develop pathology. The present study aims to identify the main sources of animal distress and to assess the possible implementation of refinement measures in experimental infection research, using mouse models of tuberculosis (TB) as a case study. This choice is based on the historical relevance of mouse studies in understanding the disease and the present and long-standing impact of TB on a global scale. Literature published between 1997 and 2009 was analysed, focusing on the welfare impact on the animals used and the implementation of refinement measures to reduce this impact. In this 12-year period, we observed a rise in reports of ethical approval of experiments. The proportion of studies classified into the most severe category did however not change significantly over the studied period. Information on important research parameters, such as method for euthanasia or sex of the animals, were absent in a substantial number of papers. Overall, this study shows that progress has been made in the application of humane endpoints in TB research, but that a considerable potential for improvement remains.