Animal Research Statistics for Northern Ireland 2013

We’ve been busy expanding our animal research statistics on the website. We now have a new main statistics page, from which viewers can then look at pages devoted to the number of animal experiments in different countries (note that “Statistics” in the Facts menu no longer sends readers to the US stats page, though no urls have changed).

On Friday we posted statistics for the Netherlands, today we produce the recently published statistics for Northern Ireland. Whereas England, Scotland and Wales (collectively “Great Britain”) produce one set of statistics together (which tend to be referred to as the “UK Stats”, though this is not technically correct), Northern Ireland produce their own. However, practically, Great Britain accounts for over 99.5% of the UK’s animal experiments, so they are often referred to as the UK stats.

According to the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety in Northern Ireland, in 2013, there were 19,860 procedures on 18,638 animals. Most of these were on mice, but there was also a significant number of pigs (959), sheep (790), cattle (914), birds (2095), rats (995) and fish (521). No cats, dogs or primates were used in 2013.

Compared with the previous year, there were 1,193 more animals used, representing a 7% rise from 2012. This was likely due to a rise in the number of chickens (up 1,076).

animal testing statistics northern ireland

Click to Enlarge

It should be noted that despite Northern Ireland using 200 times fewer animals than the rest of the UK, is still holds itself to the same high quality of statistical reporting.

Know of any other countries which have reported statistics in 2012 or 2013, then please tell us where to find them!

Animal Research Stats for the Netherlands in 2013

The Dutch authorities have reported on the 2013 animal experiment statistics, which were recently released by junior economic affairs minister, Sharon Dijksma.

The total numbers fell 10.6% to 526,593 animals, of which 93% were mice, rats birds or fish. This total is over 60% smaller than the historic peak of  over 1.5 million animals used in 1978.

animal research holland netherlands dutch statistics

Click to Enlarge

Full statistics can be downloaded (in Dutch) from the Ministry of Economic Affairs.

The number of primates fell over 30% from 393 to 262 between 2012 and 2013.The number of experiments on genetically modified animals fells by 4% (3,502 animals) from 92,055 to 88,553 – though they now represent a larger proportion of the total number (16.8%, up from 15.6% in 2012).

According to Dutch News, 88 organisations are licensed to conduct animal studies.

Like the UK, and several other EU countries (e.g. Denmark, Germany, Switzerland), the Dutch Government publishes a breakdown, by species, of the number of animals involved in experiments every year. This proactive publication of the animal research statistics is definitely a step in the right direction for openness surrounding animal research.

Speaking of Research

What does your institution say about its animal research?

There was a time when institutions conducting animal research would deny that they did so (some still do!). Thankfully most research institutions have started down the path of openness. The first step, for many of these institutions, is to put a statement on their website explaining why animal research is necessary. As an institution moves towards greater transparency they may include case studies, statistics about their animal use, and information about their animal welfare.

Speaking of Research is compiling a list of statements from institutions about their animal research. We have picked either their public-facing statement, or, where appropriate, their public-facing animal research information page.

If university’s do not stand up and explain why they conduct animal research, then why should anyone else support this work? Scientists want to know their institution values their research – a public statement of support is the first step towards that goal.

Please check if your institution is included by searching (Ctrl+F) the list, which is ordered by country. If not, have we simply missed the page – in which case send us the link. Or does it not have one, in which case we recommend emailing the appropriate senior administrators and encourage them to write one.

Oxford University's Statement on Animal Research

Oxford University’s Statement on Animal Research (Click to Enlarge)

Openness at Oxford

Oxford University was once a primary target of animal rights extremists in the UK. In 2005, activists set fire to student-run university boathouses, at an estimated cost of £500,000. More bombs were placed in 2006 and 2007. The University was also the centre of the grassroots pro-research student movement, Pro-Test, which defended the building of a new, improved, animal research facility. If any university had an excuse to try and hide their animal research, it would be them – thankfully, they’re having none of it.

The “Animal Research” pages are excellent. explaining why animal research is essential for the world-leading medical and scientific work being done by the institution. Oxford provide case studies (with videos and pictures) explaining why they use animals for specific pieces of research, they have details of how animal welfare is monitored and improved, they have details of the regulations, and they provide a great overview which includes common questions about research.

Around half the diseases in the world have no treatment. Understanding how the body works and how diseases progress, and finding cures, vaccines or treatments, can take many years of painstaking work using a wide range of research techniques. There is overwhelming scientific consensus worldwide that some research using animals is still essential for medical progress.

We hope that all institutions become more open about the role of animals in research and why their institution conducts such studies. The more open we are, the better public understanding about animal research is, and the more we show that we have nothing to hide.

So check if your institution has a statement on animal research, and if not – ask them why.

 

 

Let’s show the world what animal research looks like!

Animal rights activists frequently use images of animals which do not offer a fair representation of research. Photos are often from other countries, out of date, or entirely out of context. Consider the primate image below, which can also be found on placards of demonstrators in 1980 (See Animals’ Defender – Jan/Feb 1981, p6).

The primate image on the left is over 30 years old

The primate image on the left is over 30 years old

It is up to scientists to help rebalance this. If you want to see the scale of the problem then I recommend you Google ‘animal testing‘ or even ‘animal research‘ and look at the huge number of unrepresentative images.

A number of Canadian researchers recently helped us take a step in the right direction. They went to their labs and took some photos of animals and provided Speaking of Research with the rights to the picture (see pictures below). We are now sharing these under the Creative Commons By Attribution (CC BY). This means you can use and share the image provided you mention it came from “www.speakingofresearch.com”. By providing these on Creative Commons we can help spread them far and wide. Next time you see a media story about animal research, would you rather see our pictures, or the ones sent by activists?

We need you. We need as many pictures as possible. We need you to provide us with the right to the picture so that we can release them to the world CC free, with an attribution license that will send people back to our website to discover accurate information about animal research.

We need pictures of animals in enclosures, pictures of the refinements in animal housing, pictures of animals undergoing procedures. We need all species, especially the mice, rats, birds and fish than make up around 95% of research subjects.

Pictures should be sent to contact@speakingofresearch.com

Take a photo of your animals and help combat the misrepresentation of animal research. Tweet this!

See some of our existing images below: (Click to enlarge)

You can find all our photos permanently based on our resources page. This is along with our background briefings on animal research and other materials.

Speaking of Research

UCLA Chancellor on the Importance of Research

Earlier this week, UCLA Chancellor Gene Block sent an email to the entire campus community entitled “A Message on the Importance of Research.”  In the message, Chancellor Block emphasizes the importance of medical research using animals and expresses support and admiration to all members of the UCLA family engaged in this work.  Below is the text of the email.

 

Gene-Block-e1329788146620-600x399

UCLA Chancellor Gene Block

To the Campus Community:

Last week, the Daily Bruin published an important and compelling column by a member of our faculty, psychology and psychiatry professor David Jentsch. In it, Professor Jentsch rightfully encourages our students to use their knowledge and skills for the betterment of our world, which includes engaging in important scientific research.

For many years, Professor Jentsch has conducted essential research aimed at understanding brain chemistry in order to treat the root causes of addiction, a disease that destroys lives and families. This work has required responsible animal research.

I think it’s important that everyone take the time to read this column. As someone who has continued his lifesaving work despite being a target of violence and harassment by animal rights activists for many years, Professor Jentsch offers a critical and unique voice on this subject. Unfortunately, he has not been the only faculty member targeted by activists. Several of our other faculty members who engage in animal research have been similarly targeted and yet have bravely persevered despite these shameless tactics. Our campus has worked through the legal system and with law enforcement to protect our researchers, and I want to use this occasion to make it clear that all members of the UCLA community who contribute to scientific and medical progress continue to have our support, respect and admiration.Please always remember that animal research is closely monitored and subject to multiple stringent federal laws and university regulations. As Professor Jentsch writes, “Be a proud scientist… I stand with you.”As UCLA’s chancellor, I stand with him and all those who are dedicated to improving health and saving lives.

Sincerely,
Gene D. Block
Chancellor

Top Israeli academics beg Prime Minister to protect animal research

Seven Nobel Laureates and the Presidents of seven major Israeli universities and research institutes are the signatories of an unprecedented letter that calls for to government to refrain to impose any additional limitations on the use of animals in research. A translation of the letter can be found below:

Such limitations, and pressure from activists resulted in the birth of Pro-Test Israel earlier this year. The former Environment Minister, Gilad Ardan, added regulations to prevent the export of primates for biomedical research, claiming that such experiments were immoral. Activist pressure in 2012 had already forced Israel’s largest airline, El Al, to stop transporting primates for research, and they have since refused to carry any animals involved in medical research – to the detriment of patients worldwide.

The letter sent to PM Benjamin Netanyahu

The letter sent to PM Benjamin Netanyahu. A translation can be found below

Nobel Laureates Explain need for animal research

Nobel Laureates from Left to Right: Prof Yonath; Prof Shechtman; Prof Levitt; Prof Hershko; Prof Warshel; Prof Ciechanover

An article by Ariela Ringel Hoffman and published in the Israeli newspaper, Yedioth Ahronoth, provided a copy of the letter. It also gathered quotes from the Nobel Laureates who has signed their name. Among notable statements Professor Aaron Ciechanover said “We decided the time has come to tell truth and lay the facts in front of the public.” Professor Arieh Warshel added “The existing limitations are already making it difficult to carry out advanced research.” Professor Avram Hershko noted “I know few professional doctors that oppose such experiments.”

Perhaps most concerning was the comment by Professor Dan Shechtman, who said: “Animal rights organizations forced us to write this letter to the Prime Minister”.

It is definitely worrying when a countries top academics feel the need to publish a letter to the Prime Minister expressing their concerns about the direction of research in their country.

The following is a translation from the original Hebrew letter (pictured above).

To: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu

The future of the biomedical research in Israel is in danger
We, the undersigned, Presidents of the Israeli universities and Nobel laureates, write to you in an unusual way and out of concern and fear for the future of the scientific research in genera1l, and specifically biomedical research in Israel.

We want to state clearly that we are not asking you for any additional budget. Until today, despite smaller budgets compared with those offered by academic institutes in other countries, the academic research institutes of the state of Israel manage to be at the front line of scientific and biomedical research worldwide.

Research in Israel has lead to significant breakthroughs in the scientific and biomedical knowledge and some of them have led to the development of drugs and treatments for incurable and chronic diseases such as Parkinson’s, cancers, Alzheimer’s, blindness, schizophrenia and many other diseases.

Those treatments and drugs save the lives and improve the quality of life of billions of people and makes Israel’s science renowned across the world.

Lately we see attempts almost every day to block the activity of the Israeli academic research institutes that use animals in their research. These attempts include legislation aimed at blocking such research. This is done by a loud minority which opposes any kind of animal use and now threatens the existence of the scientific and biomedical research in Israel.

The limitations now put in place are already creating difficulties for researchers in Israel to conduct advanced research which is critical for the scientific knowledge that can save the lives of billions of people and improves their life quality. Such limitations can lead to the destruction of many years of research and academic achievement.

Research with animals is carried out in Israel according Israeli’s Animal Welfare (Experiments on Animals) Act, 1994. Research is done only with a specific permit and supervision, and only if no non-animal alternative is viable. Such research is essential to save human lives and that why it must continue.

We would like to warn you that scientific research in Israel is in a real danger. We ask you and your government to prioritize scientific excellence in the national interest and to examine each new legislation which might have direct or indirect effects on research in consultation with the relevant experts in the field, so that we can allow the necessary conditions to allow scientific research in Israel remain at the forefront of the international scientific community.

Signatories:

Prof Aaron Ciechanover – Nobel Prize in Chemistry, 2004
Prof Ada Yonath – Nobel Prize in Chemistry, 2009
Prof Avram Hershko – Nobel Prize in Chemistry, 2004
Prof Michael Levitt – Nobel Prize in Chemistry, 2013
Prof Arieh Warshel – Nobel Prize in Chemistry, 2013
Prof Dan Shechtman – Nobel Prize in Chemistry, 2011
Prof Roger Kornberg – Nobel Prize in Chemistry, 2006

Prof Menachem Ben-Sasson – President of the Hebrew University of Jersualem
Prof Daniel Zajfman – President of Weitzmann Institute of Science
Prof Peretz Latvie – President of Technion – Israel Institute of Technology
Prof Joseph Klafter – President of Tel Aviv University
Prof Rivka Carmi – President of Ben-Gurion University of the Negev
Prof Dan Hershkowitz – President of Bar-Ilan University
Amos Shapira – President of the University of Haifa
Prof Jacob Metzer – President of the Open University of Israel

Israel publishes its animal research statistics annually. In 2013, researchers used 299,144 animals of which 86% were mice and rats. 80% of the research is conducted in the universities and research institutions – the majority of which are represented in the letter to Benjamin Netanyahu.

Animals used in research in Israel 2010-13

Speaking of Research

Peritoneal Carcinosis and HIPEC: A second chance for patients, thanks to animal research

When we hear the phrase ‘animal research’ we tend to think about the development of new drugs for the clinical practice, or studying molecular pathways involved in the progression of disease; but we must also remember that the techniques used in the operation room are a consequence of biomedical research, including the use of animals. It is not just the creation of these techniques but also for the prior steps necessary for us to consider a surgical technique as an option when faced with a disease. An example of this is research into a type of cancer known as Peritoneal Carcinosis (PC) and the development of a technique, known as HIPEC, that may dramatically improve the prognosis for patients with this type of cancer.

What is the definition of Peritoneal Carcinosis? We describe this medical condition as the presence of neoplastic nodules caused by the spreading of a primary or secondary tumor in the peritoneal cavity. The peritoneal cavity, also called the abdominal cavity, is the largest body cavity and contains many of the major organs – such as the liver, kidneys, stomach and intestines – surrounded by a protective membrane known as the peritoneum.

Although PC is sometimes seen in primary tumours, such as peritoneal mesothelioma or Pseudomyxoma peritoneii, it is more frequently observed as a metastatic diffusion of gastroenteric (stomach and colon, primary) or gynaecologic (ovarian) tumors. In the second situation, we could see it as an advanced manifestation present at the same time as the primary neoplastic disease or appearing in the years following treatment of the tumour. This condition is often associated with a poor prognosis (about 6 months), depending on the site to which it spreads, the involvement of abdominal organs (like colon or liver) and how aggressive is the tumor at the moment of diagnose.

Peritoneal Carcinosis viewed by laparoscopy. Image: www.cancersurgery.us

Peritoneal Carcinosis viewed by laparoscopy. Image: http://www.cancersurgery.us

In the past, physicians have had only two options when combating the disease: systemic chemotherapy or palliative surgical therapy to debulk the tumor masses- removing as much as possible of tumors which cannot be entirely removed –  and prevent severe conditions such as bowel obstruction. Recently, surgical research developed another therapeutic approach, known as Cytoreduction (CR) associated with Hyperthermic intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC). This technique consists of a two-part operation: during the first part, the surgeon debulks as much of the neoplastic nodules in the peritoneal cavity as possible, and in the second stage the peritoneal cavity is washed with a hyperthermic chemotherapy solution, where a solution containing a high concentration of chemotherapy drugs is heated to above body temperature (usually 41.5°-42.5°C) which increases absorption of the drugs by the target tumor and therefor their effectiveness.

The role of the hyperthermic solution and the possibility of using a high-dose of chemotherapic agent was developed through research in rodents and dogs: these studies demostrated that the peritoneal barrier itself is not a barrier that prevents substances from pass through it. This is in agreement with observations made during surgery in human patients, when we remove the peritoneum (for example, when we debulk a neoplastic nodule on a peritoneal surface with a technique known as peritonectomy) the rate at which drugs are cleared from peritoneal cavity is not significantly affected. [1]

Studies in dogs and subsequently in human volunteers demonstrated that the high concentration of chemotherapeutic drugs in the peritoneal cavity is not related to a high concentration of these in the blood stream [2]. In particular a key study undertaken in dogs by Rubin et al. [3], consisted of studying the effects of removing portions of the perotineum such as the the omentum, the mesentery or the small bowel on the clearance of substances like glucose, urea and insulin from the peritoneal cavity. Surprisingly, this experiment indicated that these operations do not influence the clearance of these substances. On the base of these observation, clinical studies were started on clearance of drugs from the peritoneal compartment:. These clinical studies demonstrated that the process observed in dog with other substances occured also with drugs and that, in some cases, the concentration of a drug within the peritoneal cavity could be extremely high without having effects on the concentration in the bloodstream.

A natural consequence of this evidence is that we can use a high-dose chemotherapy drug against these nodules without having systemic adverse effects on the patient, a problem frequently observed in conventional systemic chemotherapy. These studies also led researchers to reconsider the spreading of a tumour in the peritoneal cavity not as a systemic dissemination but as a local disease, and that treatment might be able to cure it rather than just have a palliative impact. If the peritoneal barrier can selectively allow only some molecules to pass through, it could have also an active role on slowing the diffusion of metastatic cancer cells.

This evidence, together with the property of hyperthermia in helping drugs to penetrate cancer cells [4], and avoid the normal defences that a tumor cell has, led to development of this ambitious surgical technique.

The results of this combined technique is clear. Against primary tumors this technique shows a high survival-rate after 5 years (reaching 96% in some studies [5]). Against secondary spreading of gastroenteric or gynaecological tumours it shows a lower efficacy that may be related to the more diverse biological characteristics of the tumor cells, to the physiopathological features (diffusion, tumor already treated with chemotherapy etc.) and also to the characteristics of the patient (such as clinical status, age, concomitant diseases) [6],[7],[8],[9]. The 5-years survival rate for PC from colorectal cancer, for example, according to studies conducted by Dr. Paul Sugarbaker of the Washington Cancer Institute, one of the most important researcher on this field, is around 40%, when the cytoreduction is complete and the disease is not so diffuse in the peritoneal cavity. [7] Also, this surgical approach can be uses a second time, in case of a recurrence of PC, and, ultimately, as a palliative treatment to delay complications and reduce suffering of the cancer patients.

These numbers could seem low but we have to consider that we’re facing a disease that is often fatal within six months if left untreated. This technique gives patients another chance until very recently, they did not have. Why? Because of research that was built up, in part, thanks to animal research

These results are a direct effect of research in the fields of surgery and oncology, from the including the development of more effective chemotherapic agents, research that, as we have said many times, requires the study of animals for everything from the basic understanding of the processes involved to the preclinical testing a new therapy’s effectiveness and safety profile.

Marco Delli Zotti

[1] Michael F. Flessner “The transport barrier in intraperitoneal therapy” Am J Physiol Renal Physiol 288:F433-F442, 2005. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15692055

[2] Pierre Jacquet, Andrew Averbach, Arvil D. Stephens, O. Anthony Stuart, David Chang, Paul H. Sugarbaker “Heated Intraoperative Intraperitoneal Mitomycin C and Early Postoperative Intraperitoneal 5-Fluorouracil: Pharmacokinetic Studies” Oncology 1998;55:130–138 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9499187

[3] Rubin J, Jones Q, Planch A, Rushton F, Bower J. “The importance of the abdominal viscera to pertioneal transport during peritoneal dialysis in the dog.” Am J Med Sciences 1986;292:203– 208. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3752166

[4] Elwood P. Armour, Donna McEachern, Zhenhua Wang, et al. “Sensitivity of Human Cells to Mild Hyperthermia” Cancer Res 1993;53:2740-2744. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8504414

[5] Yan TD, Black D, Savady R et al. “Systematic review on the efficacy of cytoreductive surgery and perioperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy for pseudomyxoma peritonei.” Ann Surg Oncol 2007;14:484-92 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17054002

[6] Franco Roviello, Daniele Marrelli, Alessandro Neri, Daniela Cerretani, Giovanni de Manzoni, Corrado Pedrazzani, MD, Tommaso Cioppa, MD, Giacomo Nastri, MD, Giorgio Giorgi, Enrico Pinto
“Treatment of Peritoneal Carcinomatosis by Cytoreductive Surgery and Intraperitoneal Hyperthermic Chemoperfusion (IHCP): Postoperative Outcome and Risk Factors for Morbidity” World J Surg (2006) 30: 2033–2040 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17006608

[7] Paul H. Sugarbaker “Review of a personal experience in the Management of Carcinomatosis and Sarcomatosis” Jpn J Clin Oncol 2001; 31(12)573-583 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11902487

[8] Zanon C, Bortolini M, Chiappino I et al. “Cytoreductive surgery combined with intraperitoneal chemohyperthermia for the treatment of advanced colon cancer.” World J Surg. 2006 Nov;30(11):2025-32. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17058031

[9] Bijelic L, Jonson A, Sugarbaker PH “Systematic review of cytoreductive surgery and heated intraoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy for treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis in primary and recurrent ovarian cancer.” Ann Oncol 2007;18:1943-50 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17496308

To learn more about the role of animal research in advancing human and veterinary medicine, and the threat posed to this progress by the animal rights lobby, follow us on Facebook or Twitter.