Abstract
The global nature of biomedical research’s outcomes imposes ethical obligations on researchers to promote best and acceptable practices. Researchers’ cultural settings and bench experiences could impact animals’ welfare in the research landscape. Over a decade ago, when I was a young academic and early career researcher in Nigeria, some aspects of my research prospects, efforts and findings were limited as a result of a non-functional ethics committee, legislation, housing and education on the care and use of laboratory animals. Ambiguous experimental design, statistical tools, n and group size, poor grading of animal treatment, and severity classification (suffering, distress, pain, among other harms) were recurrent issues. These limiting issues seem traceable to the unsuspecting impact of our cultural and organizational sensitivity to animal care. I still remember how rampant were public display, ritual practices, hunting, competition, aggressive training and improper treatment of animals. In some ways, cultural orientations normalize the unethical use of animals from all sources. By and large, there was no penalty for unwholesome conduct against animals. In this troubling context, the prospective harmonization of ethical principles among biomedical researchers of different backgrounds could be but a mirage.
More than a decade of interactions with some of my colleagues and collaborators from different animal research centres in Nigeria has revealed improper profiling (strain, age, origin, etc.), handling, housing or upkeep of animals. According to some of them, sometimes breeders with little or no knowledge of animal biology or science serve as vendors or intermediaries. Despite the beneficial effects of removing access barriers (legally) from some peer-reviewed animal research findings and repositories, little has changed. There is a need to progress from the current scenario, keeping up with emerging scientific challenges and playing a leading role in global research. The 3Rs, ARRIVE guidelines and other, similar, initiatives in animal care and welfare demand strict regulations. With my training and contributions involving animal research at both the Institute of Biological Sciences of the Federal University of Goias and the Department of Biomolecular Sciences, University of Mississippi, I do not doubt that paradigm shifts have been made at some research centres in Nigeria through the transference of state-of-the-art techniques, donation and capacity building, infrastructural improvement and funding for animal research. The laboratory animal science community and like partners could strengthen animal welfare and the research framework and foster discussions on a harmonization drive through periodic training, scientific events/meetings, scholarships, a tailored-travel grant and oversight efforts. A working group could be established and empowered to engage relevant stakeholders (institutions, decision-makers, funding agencies, government representatives, business leaders) in an effort geared towards restructuring and institutionalizing animal ethics committees and research policies.
My vision for the laboratory animal science field in Nigeria and other states in Africa still sticking with the status quo is to build networks that support the training of animal care staff, research scientists, veterinarians, graduates and undergraduate students whose consciousness of the link between animal welfare, strict adherence to relevant regulations and transparency remains a prerequisite of sound science. Under enabling environments, it is possible to mould the biomedical workforce to drive ethically acceptable animal research with ripple effects on our sociocultural perception of animal care.
