UNM Experiment Shows Need for Improved Accountability in Research

iStockphoto

Mice are not covered under the Animal Welfare Act

In an experiment performed at University of New Mexcio, mice were forced to swim until nearly drowning, hung by their tails with adhesive tape, and electrically shocked, all to measure hopelessness and depression.

What's worse, this so-called research was the basis of a high school student's science fair project. If these methods seem like egregious animal suffering disguised under the name of science—you are right. This case also involved researchers shunning minimal standards that are in place and officials withholding information from the public.  

Performed at the University of New Mexico (UNM) under the supervision of researchers there, a high school student observed the behavior of the mice as they thrashed, kicked, twitched, and fought for their lives until near drowning.

In another experiment, pregnant mice were placed in dirty cages that had recently housed rats (who eat mice), to induce fear and stress. Later, the offspring were electrically shocked to see if they reacted differently than infant mice whose mothers were not put under such stress.

The project was disqualified from the Intel Science and Engineering Fair for violating the rules of ethical and humane treatment of animals, according to the Albuquerque Journal, a local paper that has been following the incident. The University's Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC)―the committee charged with ensuring that university experiments follow federal laws and guidelines—said in a report that the researcher in charge did not obtain protocol approval for the research conducted, therefore the research violated federal guidelines. The IACUC has the authority to prohibit experiments (although uncommonly practiced) and these mice could have been spared such suffering.

The former UNM veterinarian who witnessed this experiment reported to the university that these animals experienced the "most severe forms of pain and distress", according to the Journal. The veterinarian is now involved in a lawsuit against the university, claiming that he was forced to resign after making complaints about the experiments.

Pain and Distress Hidden From Media

To make matters worse, the Journal said UNM's lawyers initially tried to hide information about the experiments from the media when the paper requested a copy of IACUC report. The Journal made this discovery only after later obtaining an unedited copy of the report that included detailed information about the pain and suffering the animals experienced.

The reactions of the mice—and the reports of their intense squeals—were not revealed in the report given to the Journal by UNM. David Harris, UNM President, said that he regrets the UNM lawyers' decision to redact information from the report, and blames university attorneys for making the decision to do so.

This UNM debacle is of course not the first time that failure to follow federal guidelines on the use of animals in research has led to unethical experiments. In many cases, even when guidelines or laws are not followed, the fines and repercussions are minimal.

The Cleveland Clinic Dog Demonstration Case

Several months ago, a surgical demonstration was performed on a live dog during a sales demonstration at the Cleveland Clinic in Cleveland, Ohio. In an unauthorized procedure, the dog was induced with an aneurysm by a physician so the physician could demonstrate a new medical device. According to reports, the dog was operated on and then repeatedly manipulated by non-medically trained salespeople. The physician was suspended for not getting necessary approval as required under federal law. The dog was euthanized at the conclusion of the demonstration.

iStockphoto

The HSUS supports H.R. 2193

Need for Improved Accountability 

The two cases above represent the tip of the iceberg at institutions around the country. Every large and medium-sized research institution could have researchers that try to avoid or sidestep IACUC oversight. When the research administrators feel that current oversight is too onerous or unnecessary, incidents like that at the University of New Mexico will occur. (The Cleveland Clinic case is more of an outlying "rogue researcher" example.) 

Clearly, the current oversight system is flawed. 

Fixing the System

The Humane Society of the United States would like to see the Animal Welfare Act (AWA)  amended to specifically ban the use of live animals in sales demonstrations. A recently introduced federal bill, the Animal Welfare Accountability Improvement Act (H.R. 2193), would serve this purpose, as well as increase maximum penalties for AWA violations such as the incident at Cleveland Clinic, from $2,500 to $10,000. The bill also calls for calculating fines based on the number of animals affected.   

These changes may reduce the number of uncaring administrators, but they will not affect the number of researchers who try to or actually do get around the current oversight mechanisms. Drawing local, unaffiliated members of the IACUC from local animal welfare groups would also help oversight. While the research community has traditionally resisted such a mandate, some progressive institutions do appoint animal welfare personnel to their IACUCs.

"Polls have shown time and again that Americans care about the welfare of animals used in medical research and that they expect standards of care to be in place to limit their suffering," said Wayne Pacelle, president and CEO of The HSUS.

Mice, Rats, Birds: No Welfare Protections

Even increased penalties for AWA violations would not apply to the UNM mice experiments. Mice are not covered by the Animal Welfare Act, the result an amendment supported by the research lobby that excludes mice, rats and birds from AWA coverage. Although UNM is required to follow Public Health Service (PHS) policy (which does include mice studies) because it receives PHS funding, PHS policy does not carry the weight of the AWA, and it doesn't impose financial penalties—a major failure of the animal research oversight system in the United States.