Anger at centre for animal welfare

April 9, 2004

A new government centre for research on alternatives to animal research is expected to anger anti-vivisection groups by underlining the need for some animal experiments to continue.

The national centre for the "3Rs" - the reduction, refinement and replacement of animal experiments - is a response to recommendations made by the House of Lords. It will not be unveiled by the Office of Science and Technology for some weeks.

But sources close to the project said the government was keen to stress that animal research was important and that improving the welfare of animals used in experiments would be just as important as searching for alternatives.

This has caused anger among anti-vivisection groups. Gill Langley, the scientific adviser to the Dr Hadwen Trust, which campaigns against animal experiments, said: "The government is about to miss a fabulous opportunity to make Britain a world leader in the burgeoning field of non-animal research."

But Philip Connolly, the director of the Coalition for Medical Progress, an umbrella group of research funders that promotes public dialogue about animal research, said public concern to reduce animal suffering spoke of a wish to see experiments refined.

Colin Blakemore, chief executive of the Medical Research Council, said: "At present, real gains in animal welfare are more likely to come through improvement of animal husbandry, and experimental design and practice, than through replacement."

The centre may attract up to£1 million in government funding.

Related story
Animal tests can't be avoided

You've reached your article limit.

Register to continue

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Most Commented

James Fryer illustration (27 July 2017)

It is not Luddism to be cautious about destroying an academic publishing industry that has served us well, says Marilyn Deegan

Jeffrey Beall, associate professor and librarian at the University of Colorado Denver

Creator of controversial predatory journals blacklist says some peers are failing to warn of dangers of disreputable publishers

Hand squeezing stress ball
Working 55 hours per week, the loss of research periods, slashed pensions, increased bureaucracy, tiny budgets and declining standards have finally forced Michael Edwards out
Kayaker and jet skiiers

Nazima Kadir’s social circle reveals a range of alternative careers for would-be scholars, and often with better rewards than academia

hole in ground

‘Drastic action’ required to fix multibillion-pound shortfall in Universities Superannuation Scheme, expert warns