Changing times: talking about animals in biomedical research

Views on the use of animals in biomedical research, both within the scientific community and among the UK public, have changed significantly over the past 15 years. We now live in a very different society to that of 2002, the high-point of animal-rights extremism in the UK.

Today, recruiters advertise openly for animal technicians, tours of animal facilities (both in person and via online virtual tours) allow the public to see conditions for themselves, and there are frequent media stories about medical breakthroughs using animals. A growing group of research organisations, learned societies and research funders are actively engaging the public to talk about why they use animals and how they care for them. The impacts on the life-science sector have been profound, changing a culture of fear to one of confidence and pride.

Things were very different at the turn of the Millennium. During the 1980s a small group of activists began to target prominent scientists. As the extremist movement gathered force, checking cars for bombs and post for explosives or razor blades became routine for those who worked with research animals.

The extremists were portrayed by the media as underdogs, champions of defenceless animals, and they had strong public support. Science was often portrayed as cruel and profit driven. Although individuals spoke up, institutions were often intimidated into silence. From 2002 until 2005, as scientists such as Colin Blakemore began to speak out, it became increasingly clear that more needed to be done to address the one-sided messaging and to ensure that the public had more balanced, reliable information.

Change came in 2005 when harassment and conspiracy became criminal offences, and the ringleaders of the extremist groups were arrested and jailed. In 2006 the first pro-animal research movement ‘Pro-Test’ took to the streets of Oxford in support of the animal facility that was being built there, and public opinion began to turn.

The more supportive public environment gave a number of institutions the confidence to fight back. Increasingly, university press-releases talked about ‘mice’ or ‘rabbits’ rather than ‘preclinical research’ and this was reflected in news stories. Outreach programmes took scientists into schools to talk about their use of animals, and a few institutions opened their doors to journalists. Over five years animal research lost its controversial edge. In 2012, University of Leicester invited the media to the opening of their new animal facility in an unprecedented step for the sector.

But for many organisations openness on animal research was still considered an unnecessary risk. Why draw attention to their activities when they were not being targeted? Researchers continued to be trained to check for bombs, not to use social media and to take care who they spoke to about their work. Institutional reluctance to talk about animal research was evident, and consequently they appeared to have something to hide.

In 2012, for the first time in ten years, polls showed a drop in public acceptance of animal research. The research community needed to change if it was to regain public trust, and action was taken. Consolidating the small steps of the previous decade, over forty scientific organisations, including the BIA, publically acknowledged the loss of public trust and pledged to support greater openness.

Over 18 months the group developed the Concordat on Openness on Animal Research in the UK, a voluntary code of practice supporting proactive communications and transparency. The Concordat was developed by the scientific community, but grounded in public dialogue. It launched in May 2015 with over 70 signatories. Three years on, 117 organisations are signed up to its commitments. The BIA’s position statement on the use of animals in research is available here.

So many organisations taking a step forward together has helped create an atmosphere of mutual support and healthy competition. Awards for openness and transparency support and recognise best practice, while annual workshops allow signatories to share experiences and work together on some of the more challenging issues raised by the Concordat.

The aim is not to convince everyone that animal research is a good thing, but to show that it is well scrutinised and research organisations have nothing to hide. Indeed, openness and transparency provide opportunities for greater public scrutiny of research, shining a light on this previously hidden area and building knowledge and insight into what really goes on within the UK’s animal facilities. 

About UAR

Understanding Animal Research (UAR) is a not-for-profit organisation that explains why animals are used in medical and scientific research. UAR aims to achieve a broad understanding of the humane use of animals in medical, veterinary, scientific and environmental research in the UK. The BIA is a member and supporter of the UAR