Institute for Biomedical Ethics and History of Medicine, University of Zurich, Switzerland.
Animal Welfare Division, Veterinary Public Health Institute University of Bern, Switzerland.
Lab Anim. 2021 Jun;55(3):233-243. doi: 10.1177/0023677220968583. Epub 2020 Nov 20.
Using animals for research raises ethical concerns that are addressed in project evaluation by weighing expected harm to animals against expected benefit to society. A harm-benefit analysis (HBA) relies on two preconditions: (a) the study protocol is scientifically suitable and (b) the use of (sentient) animals and harm imposed on them are necessary for achieving the study's aims. The 3Rs (Replace, Reduce and Refine) provide a guiding principle for evaluating whether the use of animals, their number and the harm imposed on them are necessary. A similar guiding principle for evaluating whether a study protocol is scientifically suitable has recently been proposed: the 3Vs principle referring to the three main aspects of scientific validity in animal research (construct, internal and external validity). Here, we analyse the internal consistency and compatibility of these two principles, address conflicts within and between the 3Rs and 3Vs principles and discuss their implications for project evaluation. We show that a few conflicts and trade-offs exist, but that these can be resolved either by appropriate study designs or by ethical deliberation in the HBA. In combination, the 3Vs, 3Rs and the HBA thus offer a coherent framework for a logically structured evaluation procedure to decide about the legitimacy of animal research projects.
将动物用于研究引起了伦理方面的关注，这些关注在项目评估中通过权衡对动物的预期伤害和对社会的预期益处来解决。危害-效益分析（HBA）依赖于两个前提条件：（a）研究方案在科学上是合适的，（b）使用（有感知力的）动物和对它们造成的伤害对于实现研究目标是必要的。3R（替代、减少和优化）为评估动物的使用、数量和对它们造成的伤害是否必要提供了一个指导原则。最近提出了一个类似的评估研究方案在科学上是否合适的指导原则：3V 原则，指的是动物研究中科学有效性的三个主要方面（构建、内部和外部有效性）。在这里，我们分析了这两个原则的内在一致性和兼容性，解决了 3R 和 3V 原则内部和之间的冲突，并讨论了它们对项目评估的影响。我们表明，存在一些冲突和权衡，但这些可以通过适当的研究设计或 HBA 中的伦理审议来解决。因此，3V、3R 和 HBA 结合起来为一个逻辑结构的评估程序提供了一个连贯的框架，以决定动物研究项目的合法性。
