Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Ethical decision making about animal experiments.

F Barbara Orlans

    Ethics & Behavior
    |January 1, 1997
    PubMed
    Summary
    This summary is machine-generated.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    The injustice of excluding laboratory rats, mice, and birds from the Animal Welfare Act.

    Kennedy Institute of Ethics journal·2001
    Same author

    Institutional animal care and use committees: a flawed paradigm or work in progress?

    Ethics & behavior·1997
    Same author

    The three Rs in research and education: a long road ahead in the United States.

    Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA·1996
    Same author

    Investigator competency and animal experiments: guidelines for elementary and secondary education.

    Lab animal·1995
    Same author

    Prolonged water deprivation: a case study in decision making by an IACUC.

    ILAR news·1991
    Same author

    Animal pain scales in public policy.

    ATLA abstracts·1990
    Same journal

    Incidental Genetic Findings Discovered During Autopsy: An Ethical Analysis of Patient Confidentiality Post-Mortem.

    Ethics & behavior·2025
    Same journal

    Ethical considerations for the use of ecological momentary assessment in non-suicidal self-injury research.

    Ethics & behavior·2025
    Same journal

    Addressing Fraudulent Responses in Quantitative and Qualitative Internet Research: Case Studies from Body Image and Appearance Research.

    Ethics & behavior·2025
    Same journal

    Research ethics education needs assessment in Serbian medical researchers.

    Ethics & behavior·2025
    Same journal

    Aligning values with standards: a comparison of professional values in Continuing Education standards.

    Ethics & behavior·2024
    Same journal

    Implementation of a Risk Reduction Protocol in Youth Violence Research.

    Ethics & behavior·2024
    See all related articles

    Ethical review of laboratory animal use requires Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees to first identify unacceptable procedures. Balancing animal harms against human benefits and including diverse perspectives enhances ethical decision-making.

    Area of Science:

    • Veterinary Ethics
    • Animal Welfare Science

    Background:

    • Laboratory animals require ethical review for protection.
    • Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees (IACUCs) are primarily responsible for this review.
    • Ethical review involves identifying unacceptable procedures and balancing harms against benefits.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To outline the essential duties of ethical review committees for laboratory animal use.
    • To propose methods for enhancing ethical deliberation and decision-making.
    • To advocate for a more balanced committee composition.

    Main Methods:

    • Identifying ethically unacceptable procedures irrespective of potential knowledge gain.
    • Assessing the balance between animal harms and potential human benefits.
    Keywords:
    Biomedical and Behavioral ResearchGuide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (National Research Council)

    Related Experiment Videos

  • Examining the use of animal pain and distress classification systems in ethical analysis.
  • Discussing the benefits of diverse committee membership, including animal welfare representatives and non-animal researchers.

    • Main Results:

    • Some procedures are ethically unacceptable regardless of potential benefits and should be disapproved.
    • A classification system for animal pain and distress, used in several countries, aids ethical analysis.
    • Diverse committee perspectives, including those from animal welfare organizations and non-animal researchers, can improve ethical discussions.

    Conclusions:

    • Ethical review must prioritize the identification of unacceptable procedures.
    • Implementing pain/distress classification systems and ensuring diverse committee representation are crucial for robust ethical oversight.
    • Enhancing ethical review processes protects vulnerable laboratory animals and improves scientific integrity.