Tag Archives: animal welfare

Animal Care Technicians

Many misconceptions exist about exactly how animal research is conducted in laboratories.  Some of the misconceptions come from a lack of awareness whereas others come in the form of intentional misinformation on the part of animal rights groups.  Successful research relies on the dedication of many individuals with a variety of roles, from primary investigators doing the research to the veterinary staff providing medical care to the animals.  One group that is often overlooked, but is vital to the success, is the animal care staff.

Most animal research facilities have a dedicated staff of people whose job is to provide daily care for the animals in their charge.  The animals are dependent upon these individuals to provide food, water, clean living environments, and environmental enrichment.  Research animals must be cared for 7 days a week, 365 days a year regardless of weather, holidays or personnel shortages. The job requires the caretakers to stand for long periods, move heavy bags of feed and manoeuvre caging and equipment around to be cleaned.  The animal care staff also must be well versed in caring for many different species of animals.  An animal facility can have many species such as rodents, rabbits, dogs and swine all located within the same facility.  All require different types of care

Laboratory Dogs
Equally important to the task of keeping caging, equipment and facilities clean is the responsibility of the animal care staff to act as the first line of medical care for the animals.   While different facilities have different ways of performing the task of medical care, the animal care staff is typically the first to notice problems with animal health due to their daily contact with the animals.  By bringing problems to the attention of the veterinary staff, the animal care staff help ensure that the animals are provided with timely treatment.  In order to reliably report an animal that is in distress the care staff must know what “normal” is.  Therefore, most animal care programs include extensive training regimes designed not only to provide initial training, but also to provide refresher course that keep individuals up to date on new care standards.  Many institutions also require the animal care staff to obtain certification from the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science (AALAS) or its equivalent internationally.

The certification process shows a commitment by the research institutions to provide superior care and a commitment on the part of the individuals obtaining certification to performing their jobs to exacting standards.  At the technician level there are three certification classifications; the Assistant Laboratory Animal Technician (ALAT), the Laboratory Animal Technician (LAT), and the Laboratory Animal Technologist (LATG). Each level focuses on a different set of skills.  The ALAT focuses on animal husbandry and welfare along with facility operations.  The LAT focuses more on procedural techniques, a more in depth look at animal husbandry and touches on animal facility management.  An LAT candidate is also expected to be able to retain information learned at the ALAT level and questions on the test could come from either level.  The third level is the LATG which splits its focus between higher level animal husbandry needs and facilities management.  It’s not uncommon for research facilities to require at least the first level of certification while strongly encouraging the obtaining of the other two.  For those individuals wishing to move into management positions a certification process is available as well.

Without animal care staff at various research institutes, the important research being conducted would be difficult to complete.  Although this group is not often mentioned in final research papers, these individuals are critical to the success of any research project.

Regards

Dave Bienus

Have your Senator and Congressman signed yet?

Backing up a recent post by DrugMonkey, Speaking of Research is now urging you to write to your Member of Congress (contact my Congress Representative) and Senator (contact my Senator) to request that they sign the Pro-Test Petition.

For example (Pick one of the three coloured paragraphs):

Dear <insert name of your Senator/Member of Congress here>,

I am contacting you to urge to you to sign the Pro-Test Petition which seeks to defend the rights of scientists to use animals in medical research. The petition can be found at www.raisingvoices.net. It states:

We the undersigned believe:

  1. That animal research has contributed and continues to contribute to major advances in the length and quality of our lives.  It remains vital to understanding basic biological processes and for the development of new treatments and therapies such as antibiotics, vaccines, organ transplants, and cancer medicines.
  2. That animal research is morally justifiable provided animal welfare remains a high priority and no valid non-animal alternatives are available.
  3. That violence, intimidation and harassment of scientists and others involved in animal research is neither a legitimate means of protest, nor morally justified.

Animal research has played a part in nearly every major medical advance from penicillin (mice) and insulin (dogs, rabbits, mice) to meningitis vaccines (mice) and anti-retroviral drugs to combat AIDS (mice, monkeys). Scanning techniques, such as MRI and CT, as well as surgical procedures, such as transplants and replacement heart valve surgery, have benefited from knowledge gained through animal studies. It is important that this lifesaving method used in the development of new treatments is not blocked by a small, and often violent, minority.

Animal research is one of the most heavily regulated fields of science, with oversight at both an institutional and national level to ensure animal welfare remains a priority. Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees (IACUCs) ensure all research maintains a high standard of welfare through the application of the 3Rs – the Replacement of animals with non-animal techniques wherever possible, the Refinement of animal welfare through better housing and improved veterinary care, and the Reduction of animal research to an absolute minimum. Given this system we believe animal research can contribute to the treatments of the future while keeping the US as a front runner in animal welfare.

Researchers around the US have been under attack by a small but violent group of animal rights extremists. Arson attacks against the homes and vehicles of scientists is rising, and researchers and their families have been threatened by activists. In the UK in 2006, the then Prime Minister, Tony Blair, signed his name to the People’s Petition in support of lifesaving medical research and against the violent actions of animal rights extremists – this contributed to the swing in the public support for scientists and the important work they do for society as well as broader support for science in general. The Pro-Test Petition aims to replicate the success of its UK counterpart, and to make the public aware of the lifesaving work that researchers in the US carry out on a daily basis.

I urge you to add your signature to almost 12,000 others in supporting the aims and principles of the Pro-Test petition. To learn more about the benefits of animal research please check out www.speakingofresearch.com or www.amprogress.org.

Yours Sincerely,

<insert your name>

I hope the above model email helps – please personalize it wherever you can – the larger the variety of the emails on the same issue, the greater the likelihood of the Senator/Congressman taking action.

Cheers

Tom Holder

Animal Liberation Front Press Office become desperate

In a pathetic attempt to be noticed, North American Animal Liberation Press Officer (NAALPO), Jason S. Miller, decided to send an email to a group of researchers, research institutions and pro-research groups (including SR).

In an email containing links to typical AR pseudo-science, misinformation and misanthropic philosophy, Jason kindly explained our future:

Your newly formed “vivisector resistance movement,” as exemplified by Speaking of Research and other whoring shills for your cozy little industry, will quickly sink into the moral cesspool over which it is constructed. Your blatant speciesism, torture, murder, and anachronistic scientific practices are doomed to extinction.

Charming. I must confess I almost feel honored that Speaking of Research gets a mention – could it be we’ve hit a nerve? With animal research helping develop the medicines of tomorrow (fighting swine flu, combating HIV and offering hope for DMD patients) it would seem that such methods are far from anachronistic. I also wonder if Miller has ever seen the inside of a lab? Animal welfare is of the highest priority as you can read in our “Why Animal Welfare Matters” blog post. Oh, and what on earth is a “vivisector resistance movement”?

The Vivisector Resistance Movement?

The Vivisector Resistance Movement?

So who is this Jason Miller? Other than a member of NAALPO, an organization which reports on the violent actions of the Animal Liberation Front and the Animal Rights Militia, Miller is the founder of the “anarcho-veganist” website, Thomas Paine’s Corner (TPC):

[TPC] approaches anti-capitalism and total liberation from an essentially anarcho-veganist position, as portrayed in the graphic above by the juxtaposition of the Boy Scout–a victim of one of the indoctrinating mechanisms for our imperialist, patriarchal, faux Christian, corporatist, statist, speciesist society–against the anarchist symbol.

TPC Logo

It’s only missing “military industrial complex” and “marxism” to complete the hand (no, wait, there’s sections on the website for both of those…). Miller’s email might also have something to do with us ignoring his last hissy-fit written on TPC. Talking about the UCLA Pro-Test rally:

In that nauseating spectacle the unapologetic monkey-torturer, David Jentsch, and industry shill Tom Holder, the “founder” of Speaking of Research and a “founding member” of Pro-Test in the UK, whipped a crowd of adoring sycophants into a frenzy with a chant calling for animal testing.

Having seen some of Prof. Jentsch’s vervet monkeys I was impressed at the high standards of welfare – as well as the personal care and responsibility that Jentsch felt towards his animals. A far cry from Miller’s claims of “monkey torture”. However Miller falls into the mistaken belief that we could switch to “alternatives” tomorrow:

We have multiple other means by which we can advance our medical and scientific knowledge, including epidemiology, clinical testing, autopsies, biopsies, genetics, post-marketing drug research, computer modeling, tissue cultures, microdosing on human animals, personalized medicine, and nanotechnology

Check the “alternatives” page for scientific a deconstruction of this argument. A few intersting choices in his list – much genetics are  studied in animals, particularly mice, where you can “knock out” a certain gene to see its effect on the animal and thus the phenotype of the gene. Such work offers hope to sufferers of genetic conditions such as Cystic Fibrosis and Duchennes Muscular Dystropy. Biopsies are done on animals except the animal rights movement tends to rebrand it “vivisection”. Personalized medicine is an ideal which will certainly require animal research in its creation. The fact is these methods are complementary on animal research, not alternatives.

Well Jason, I hope you’ve learnt something – and please stop emailing large groups of people to make spurious and misanthropic claims about the research you appear to know so little about.

Regards

Tom Holder

Are you Pro-Test? Sign the Petition!!

Join over the hundreds of people (1400+ at time of writing) who have signed The Pro-Test Petition! This is a petition of scientists, students and the general public aims to show the world that the majority do support animal research – and moreover they dare stand up and sign their name to it. On April 22nd around 800 people stood up at UCLA in support of lifesaving medical research – now it’s up to you. Tell your friends, family and colleagues to go to:

www.raisingvoices.net

We the undersigned believe:

  1. That animal research has contributed and continues to contribute to major advances in the length and quality of our lives.  It remains vital to understanding basic biological processes and for the development of new treatments and therapies such as antibiotics, vaccines, organ transplants, and cancer medicines.
  2. That animal research is morally justifiable provided animal welfare remains a high priority and no valid non-animal alternatives are available.
  3. That violence, intimidation and harassment of scientists and others involved in animal research is neither a legitimate means of protest, nor morally justified.
They're Pro-Test, Are You?

They're Pro-Test, Are You?

This petition is a joint effort between  Speaking of Research, Americans for Medical Progress, and UCLA Pro-Test. This project was also motivated by the successful People’s Petition in the UK, set up by Coalition for Medical Progress (now called Understanding Animal Research) which gathered well over 20,000 signatures – including then Prime Minister, Tony Blair. In Blair’s letter to the Sunday Telegraph he wrote:

Announcing that I am to add my name to the on-line petition in support of animal testing … is something of a break with tradition – and a sign of just how important I believe it is that as many people as possible stand up against the tiny group of extremists threatening medical research and advances in this country.

With Barack Obama’s desire to increase funding in science, there has never been a better time for politicians to add their name to the Pro-Test Petition. If you do hold a particularly public post, or you a particularly eminent scientist (Nobel Prizes etc.) and you are willing to have your name highlighted in the petition – please contact us after signing.

I’ll finish with a quote from Obama:

At such a difficult moment, there are those who say we cannot afford to invest in science. That support for research is somehow a luxury at a moment defined by necessities. I fundamentally disagree. Science is more essential for our prosperity, our security, our health, our environment, and our quality of life than it has ever been. And if there was ever a day that reminded us of our shared stake in science and research, it’s today.

Never a truer word was spoken.

Cheers

Tom Holder

SR at the Scand-LAS Conference

The day after the UCLA Pro-Test rally I headed to Ystad in Sweden to give a presentation to a conference held by the Scandanavian Society for Lab Animal Science (Scand-LAS). Exhibitors of new and innovative lab animal equipment showed off the latest developments in reduction, replacement and refinement. For example, one firm offered an automatic blood sampling machine which would be hooked up to a mouse by catheter. Precise amount of blood being drawn meant that less mice could be used to attain small amounts of blood, and the mouse was happier since it would not need to be be removed from its cage to have blood drawn – reduction AND refinement. Talks at the conference varied – with talks informing technicians on the best methods of housing and feeding zebrafish, as well as presentations on the latest studies on Cystic Fibrosis.

The meeting did draw a small number of animal rights protesters who came out at 11pm to stand outside and shout slogans. When approached the protesters backed off, unwilling to debate those at the conference. Sadly for the protesters their efforts ended up appearing quite farsical – indeed it seemed odd for them to be protesting an event full of the animal care technicians and veterinarians whose job it is to look after the animals wellbeing.

My presentation – the final of the three day conference – was well received. It had undergone some major alterations on the plane from LA as I included some footage and information about the success of the UCLA Pro-Test rally on April 22nd. Many people seem keen to help write information for Speaking of Research – and all in all the event was fun and interesting!

Cheers

Tom Holder

Speaking in Nature

One of our own members, David Bienus, a animal care technician who recently wrote about his experiences of animal welfare in labs, has got his letter into the esteemed science journal Nature, a portion of which can be seen below:

nature-bienusIn your Editorial ‘Against vicious activism’ (Nature 457, 636; 2009), you call for scientists and the authorities to stand up for animal research in basic and applied science. However, you may be putting the cart before the horse in recommending that officials and politicians become advocates of animal research in order to encourage individual scientists to do so.

In the United Kingdom, it was the actions of individual scientists — and of members of the public who joined the Pro-Test demonstration in Oxford in February 2006 and signed the Coalition for Medical Progress’s petition — that gave politicians and other public figures the encouragement they needed to come out in support of animal research. The lesson to be learned from the UK experience is that scientists at the universities being targeted by extremists, alongside students and advocacy groups, must be encouraged to stand up and be counted. Only then can they expect others less directly involved to take an unequivocal public stand.

The truth, uncomfortable though it may be, is that — as with many controversial areas of science — those working with animals in research must make a public case to justify their use, and must be willing to show unequivocal support for colleagues who speak up. Do that, and the rest will follow.

David Bienus

David makes many good points including that scientists must stand up and make the case for themselves – but we all need to help them get the confidence to do it. The corresponding editorial piece also brought a nice mention to the UK organization Pro-Test (you can read more about Pro-Test on this site):

Britain again provides a good model in the form of Pro-Test, an activist group for those supporting animal research. Its efforts in Oxford have given a public face to supporters of animal testing.

Well it seems the wait is over, as our previous posts mention that students and scientists at UCLA are to march on April 22nd in support of lifesaving medical research and against those who would see it banned. More information on the UCLA Pro-Test page. On this note, the Respectful Insolence blog is the latest to be spreading news of the UCLA Pro-Test demonstration.

Regards

Tom

Animal Care Staff: ‘Why animal welfare matters’

Today begins a series of posts that try and show the activities and motivations of a handful of the dedicated animal care technicians from across the country’s animal laboratories who work tirelessly to ensure animal welfare remains the highest priority. [Tom]

For decades the animal rights movement has worked to define those working in animal research as “monsters” and “murderers” who only look to harm the animals we work with and don’t care about their welfare.  The reality, however, is very different.  In fact, as someone who works in animal research, animal welfare is extremely important both to me personally and to the results obtained from the studies.

Animal welfare is a collaboration between the animal caretakers who are in the rooms changing cages every day, myself as the veterinary technician on the veterinary staff and the investigators doing the research.  Our rodent cages are provided with nesting squares that the mice can chew up to simulate the natural behavior of building a nest.  Plastic houses can be used as a cage enrichment device although careful attention must be paid to ensure that fighting for the house doesn’t occur.  When there are swine in the facility, I have found that providing them with plastic balls that can be filled half way with water is something they particularly enjoy.  These balls then roll in random directions and give the pigs something to push around with their nose.  An older alternative was to provide bowling balls but this could cause considerable damage to the room floors as the pigs would roll them up the wall and let them drop.  Previously I had also tried deflated basketballs thinking they would like to carry them around but the pigs didn’t seem particularly interested.  The plastic balls, on the other hand, were a huge hit!

Mouse houses are an important part of enrichment

Mouse houses are an important part of enrichment

Animal welfare is not limited to just cage enrichment.  It’s the whole process from effectively washing the cages and bottles to provide a clean habitat, to handling the animals gently to prevent injury and stress.  It means adequately training the personnel in techniques and to teach update techniques as they become available.  I often provide training to new grad students and laboratory technicians in the proper way to restrain their animals and the common methods of injections and sample collection.  I’m at the disposal of any of the labs should they ever need training in a new technique or a refresher on something they haven’t done in awhile.  Finally it means providing veterinary oversight to make sure the animals are being housed and treated according to the regulations and to provide health care when needed. Several times a week I’ll go through our various facilities spread out across campus and check in with the caretakers to see if there are any problems I should be aware of or information that needs to be passed along.

Working with laboratory animals is a responsibility that I take very seriously; ensuring that the animals are treated humanely and that the research never becomes more important than the animal.

Dave Bienus
Veterinary Technician
Penn State University

Trinity College, Dublin, debates animal research

On Wednesday I travelled in Dublin to participate in a debate on animal research at the Historical Society (debating union) at Trinity College Dublin.

The motion debated was “This house believes Trinity has too little respect for nature” – with a strong focus on animal research  reinforced by the two guest speakers, myself and Yvonne Smalley of the Irish Anti-Vivisection Society. Sadly, only a few hours before the debate was due to begin, Smalley pulled out from the debate.

With five speakers per side debate was lively. Approaches from the anti-vivs focused on animal rights, with much of the floor adding their points for and against the concept. See our section on AR beliefs for a deconstruction of the “Animals have Rights” argument. Some common misconceptions on animal welfare were also used – certain people were not aware of strict regulations surrounding animal research, and others believed that cosmetic testing was carried out at Trinity (this is not the  case, and further more all cosmetic testing will be banned in Europe from March 2009).

My own speech covered the many and varied benefits of animal research, the regulations involved in ensuring animal welfare standards, and some of the crucial research going on at Trinity College Dublin, such as their development of a mouse model for Retinal Pigmentosa (a form of Blindness) which looks promising for the development of a future treatment.

Finally the debate came to vote – with a convincing victory for the “nays” over the “ayes”, with a belief that trinity college is committed to crucial medical research carried out in a considerate and respectful manner.

Cheers

Tom