Curzer Howard J, Perry Gad, Wallace Mark C, Perry Dan
Department of Philosophy, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, 79409-3092, USA.
Department of Natural Resources Management, International Center for Arid and Semiarid Land Studies, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, 79409-2125, USA.
Sci Eng Ethics. 2016 Apr;22(2):549-65. doi: 10.1007/s11948-015-9659-8. Epub 2015 May 31.
The Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) is entrusted with assessing the ethics of proposed projects prior to approval of animal research. The role of the IACUC is detailed in legislation and binding rules, which are in turn inspired by the Three Rs: the principles of Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement. However, these principles are poorly defined. Although this provides the IACUC leeway in assessing a proposed project, it also affords little guidance. Our goal is to provide procedural and philosophical clarity to the IACUC without mandating a particular outcome. To do this, we analyze the underlying logic of the Three Rs and conclude that the Three Rs accord animals moral standing, though not necessarily "rights" in the philosophical sense. We suggest that the Rs are hierarchical, such that Replacement, which can totally eliminate harm, should be considered prior to Reduction, which decreases the number of animals harmed, with Refinement being considered last. We also identify the need for a hitherto implicit fourth R: Reject, which allows the IACUC to refuse permission for a project which does not promise sufficient benefit to offset the pain and distress likely to be caused by the proposed research.
机构动物护理与使用委员会(IACUC)负责在动物研究获得批准之前评估拟议项目的伦理道德。IACUC的职责在立法和具有约束力的规则中有详细规定,而这些规定又受到“3R原则”的启发,即替代、减少和优化原则。然而,这些原则的定义并不明确。虽然这为IACUC评估拟议项目提供了一定的灵活性,但也几乎没有提供什么指导。我们的目标是为IACUC提供程序和理念上的清晰性,而不强制规定特定的结果。为此,我们分析了“3R原则”的内在逻辑,并得出结论:“3R原则”赋予了动物道德地位,尽管不一定是哲学意义上的“权利”。我们认为“3R原则”具有层级性,即能够完全消除伤害的替代应先于减少受伤害动物数量的减少,而优化则应最后考虑。我们还指出需要一个迄今隐含的第四个“R”:拒绝,这使IACUC能够拒绝批准一个不能保证有足够益处以抵消拟议研究可能造成的疼痛和痛苦的项目。