Recently we hosted an enlightening webinar titled “Speak Up About Animal Research: The Impact of Openness Around the World.” The session featured two distinguished presenters: Wendy Jarrett, Chief Executive of Understanding Animal Research (UAR), and Paula Clifford, MLA, CVT, RLATG, Executive Director of Americans for Medical Progress (AMP), as they discussed animal research openness.
The public and policymakers often misunderstand medical research involving animals. This lack of understanding is easily exploited by groups that oppose it, leading to consequences that could limit or ban animal studies. In this webinar, our experts emphasized the urgent need to address this downward momentum by fostering public understanding and acceptance.
Wendy Jarrett and Paula Clifford discussed the positive outcomes of international openness initiatives, particularly in the UK and the US. They shared insights into the progress and impact of these initiatives. Plus, they provided practical advice on how individuals can get involved in supporting and advocating for animal research.
Media Representation of Laboratory Animal Research in the UK
Laboratory animal research has sometimes been a highly contentious topic in the media, often dominated by strong opinions and sensational headlines. During our recent webinar, Wendy Jarrett emphasized how, in the past, there was a significant imbalance in UK media representation. She explained how animal rights activists and extremists frequently dominated the narrative, often showing lab animal research negatively. This skewed portrayal had implications for public perception and policymaking.
The Consequence of Media Imbalance For Animal Research Openness
Jarrett highlighted that by the early 2000s, animal rights activists had become the primary voice in media discussions on lab animal research. These activists, especially extremists, used media platforms to amplify their messages. Furthermore, they often used emotionally charged language and graphic imagery. Their stories typically focused on the ethical and moral concerns of using animals in research, aiming to evoke strong emotional responses from the public. By contrast, the scientific community did not provide any perspectives on the necessity and benefits of animal research.
This silence from scientists using animals in their research was explained by the fact that some animal rights extremists were going well beyond advocacy. For example, engaging in severe and unlawful actions against researchers. These included making death threats, harassing scientists, and committing acts of vandalism and arson. Such tactics intimidated researchers and contributed to a hostile environment that discouraged open dialogue. These offenses created a climate of fear and hindered the spread of balanced information, further skewing public understanding.
The dominance of animal rights extremists in the media leads to several consequences. Firstly, it can result in public misinformation. Secondly, it can impact policy decisions, potentially leading to stricter regulations, that may hinder scientific progress. Lastly, the negative portrayal can demoralize researchers and reduce public support for funding essential scientific studies.
The Solution: Government Support and Research Community Transparency
The imbalance in media representation of laboratory animal science posed a serious threat to scientific discoveries, necessitating urgent action. As Jarrett explained, the lab animal sector appealed to the UK government to address the issues caused by animal rights activists. They urged the government to provide stronger support. In response, the government agreed to change legislation on harassment and enhance policing efforts if the lab animal sector would openly demonstrate to the public the necessity of animal research.
This agreement sparked a significant shift towards transparency in lab animal research. A change many believed was impossible. Until then, lab animal science was shrouded in secrecy, largely due to fears of the repercussions of public disclosure.
Honest Media Coverage of Animal Research Facilities in the UK
Jarrett explains that there was a concerted effort to portray laboratory animal research honestly and accurately in the media following the agreement. She facilitated the BBC’s access to an animal research facility housing marmosets, allowing a BBC reporter to report from the nonhuman primate facility.
As part of the same program, the BBC featured a patient who had Parkinson’s disease. He appeared on national television to demonstrate the impact of his deep brain stimulation system. When he switched it off, he experienced severe tremors. Upon turning it back on, he was completely free of tremors. Then he shared that animal research made this possible and expressed his profound gratitude. The patient emphasized that nonhuman primates were crucial in developing this system, and he was immensely thankful for the research.
Next Steps: Developing the Concordat on Openness on Animal Research in the UK
In May 2014, the Concordat on Openness on Animal Research in the UK was published. This set of commitments, which requires approval at the senior management level, was established to promote transparency and openness in animal research. The Concordat is based on four key commitments:
- We will be clear about when, how, and why we use animals in research.
- We will enhance our communications with the media and the public about our research using animals.
- We will be proactive in providing opportunities for the public to find out about research using animals.
- We will report on progress annually and share our experiences.
The Impact of the Concordat on Animal Research Openness
Since the adoption of the Concordat, numerous initiatives have been launched to further transparency in animal research. These initiatives include sharing videos, photos, and virtual 360-degree tours of lab animal facilities online, educating high school students about animal research, and actively engaging with the media, public, and stakeholders.
Openness efforts have led to notable improvements in public opinion in Great Britain by 2018.
- 68% of people agreed with the statement: “I can accept the use of animals in scientific research as long as there is no unnecessary suffering to the animals and there is no alternative.”
- The percentage of the public who thought animal research organizations were secretive decreased: to 44% in 2014, 42% in 2016, and 41% in 2018.
- The percentage of the public who felt well-informed about animal research in the UK increased: by 30% in 2014, 34% in 2016, and 35% in 2018.
Animal Research Openness in the United States
Much like the UK, the United States needs a movement toward greater openness in biomedical research. Paula Clifford, the Executive Director of Americans for Medical Progress (AMP), explains why openness about animal research in the United States is necessary and outlines actions AMP is taking to help.
Misinformation and Disinformation About Animal Research in US Media
According to Clifford, animal researchers in the United States have faced similar threatening circumstances as those in the UK. Extremist groups have resorted to violent acts, such as placing car bombs under researchers’ vehicles and setting fires. In 2006, around the same time things started to change in the UK, the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act was passed in the US, increasing protections and enhancing the ability to arrest animal rights activists engaged in violent acts.
Things improved after that, but misinformation and disinformation continued to spread. Mainstream media published articles opposing biomedical research without accurate data, spreading false narratives. A common piece of disinformation is that animal research is outdated and can be entirely replaced by technology. While the industry strides toward alternatives, no technology can completely replace animal research. The problem is that the public is reading and believing this misinformation. Public perception has the power to affect policy and could potentially prevent funding.
Anti-Animal Research Legislation Rising in the US
The largest threat to animal research in the United States is public opinion. Because it significantly impacts legislation. For example, Clifford explains how a law in Virginia prohibits the sale of dogs or cats for experimental purposes for two years if a breeder for dogs or cats intended for research receives a single direct or critical violation under the Animal Welfare Act.
The same rule applies if the breeder receives three indirect or noncritical violations. This sets a concerning precedent, namely allowing states to use federal inspections as the basis of state sales restrictions, for issues that did not impact animal welfare or a breeder’s USDA license. Therefore, if these trends continue, conducting life-saving research in the United States will get increasingly challenging.
The Solution: More Public Animal Research Openness
Speakers Jarrett and Clifford agree that change is necessary to advance medicine and science. The United States Animal Research Openness (USARO) Initiative defines animal research openness as ensuring that the public can access information about why, when, and how animals are involved in research, teaching, or testing. We must increase the availability of information about animal research that clearly explains why animals are necessary for the advancement of medicine and science, when exactly animal studies are required, and how animal welfare is assured. This can be achieved in various ways!
Many universities and research institutions in the United States are making excellent strides toward greater openness. For example, numerous universities publish information, images, and videos on their websites about the types of animal research they conduct. Blog posts, articles, and webpages at prominent universities and research institutions provide honest and accurate information about the research, the types of animals being used, and the outcomes. This is an amazing start!
Clifford suggests that while this progress is fantastic, more universities and institutions must join the trend. Effective change will happen if more openness occurs across all entities that involve animals in research, teaching, or testing. Consistency is also necessary, with more institutions participating and doing so together.
Biomedical Research Awareness Day (BRAD) For More Openness
Another way the laboratory animal science community can help increase openness is by participating in Biomedical Research Awareness Day (BRAD). BRAD is a global outreach program led by Americans for Medical Progress (AMP) to increase public awareness about animal roles in biomedical research and the resulting medical advancements that benefit humans and animals. Typically, BRAD is celebrated annually on the third Thursday in April, though this date is flexible.
Institutions participate by setting up BRAD tables, handing out educational resources, hosting gatherings with food and games, and more. Many BRAD participants share their activities on social media for further reach and exposure. Check out this blog story to see what Allentown did for a BRAD celebration in the past.
In Conclusion: Advancing Science Through Animal Research Openness
Promoting openness and transparency in animal research is crucial worldwide, including in the UK and the US. It supports life-saving scientific breakthroughs, fosters trust, and dispels misinformation. Initiatives like USARO and events like Biomedical Research Awareness Day (BRAD) play pivotal roles in this effort. We can collectively advance human and animal health by encouraging more institutions to embrace openness. Watch our full on-demand webinar, to delve deeper.