A new literature review by Physicians Committee authors published in the Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science raises serious questions about whether experimenters and institutions are appropriately implementing the 3Rs—replacement, reduction, and refinement—in mice experiments.

The review, which documents trends in experiments that subject mice to pain for at least 14 days, found that the total amount of prolonged neuropathic, inflammatory, and chronic pain experiments on mice has increased dramatically in the past decade. In the 55 studies reviewed, there were no references to the 3Rs.

The authors say that their findings suggest that researchers conducting prolonged pain research on mice are paying little, if any, heed to 3Rs principles in the planning and execution of their research.

They also stress that alternative approaches exist for replacing and reducing animal use and for refining methods to minimize pain and suffering. In the area of pain research, ethical clinical studies with human patients have the advantage that humans can reliably report their experience of pain and pain relief.

Other studies in mice have been misleading researchers for years, according to a new study just published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. The study’s authors concluded: “New approaches need to be explored to improve the ways that human diseases are studied.”

The Physicians Committee addressed the 3Rs at its Animals, Research, and Alternatives conference, which brought together an international panel of experts to discuss how expanding knowledge of animals’ psychological and social attributes warrants their protections in research, and the latest and most promising alternatives to the use of animals in research.

To learn more about the problems with mice experiments, visit PCRM.org/Mousetrap.

Source: PCRM