Science,Culture,and Care in Laboratory Animal Research

Abstract

The principles of the 3Rs—replacement, refinement, and reduction—strongly shape discussion of methods for performing more humane animal research and the regulation of this contested area of technoscience. This special issue looks back to the origins of the 3Rs principles through five papers that explore how it is enacted and challenged in practice and that develop critical considerations about its future. Three themes connect the papers in this special issue. These are (1) the multiplicity of roles enacted by those who use and care for animals in research, (2) the distribution of “feelings that matter” across species and spaces of laboratory animal practice, and (3) the growing importance of “cultures of care” in animal research.

Keywords

ethics laboratory animals responsibility care sentience Haraway

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Academy of Medical Sciences. 2015. Reproducibility and Reliability of Biomedical Research: Improving Research Practice. London, UK: Academy of Medical Sciences. Accessed August 11, 2017. https://acmedsci.ac.uk/file-download/38189-56531416e2949.pdf.

Animals in Science Regulation Unit. 2015. Identification and Management of Patterns of Low-level Concerns at Licensed Establishments. London, UK: Home Office. Accessed January 25, 2018. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/512098/Patterns_low-level_concerns.pdf.

Asdal

2012. “Contexts in Action—And the Future of the Past in STS.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 37 (4): 379–403.

Asdal

forthcoming. Interested Methods and Versions of Pragmatism. Science, Technology and Human Values.

Banks

R. E.

, 1995. “The 4th R of Research.” Contemporary Topics in Laboratory Animal Science 34 (1): 50–51.

Birke

Arluke

Michael

. 2007. The Sacrifice: How Scientific Experiments Transform Animals and People. West Lafayette, WV: Purdue University Press.

Dam

M. S.

Svendsen

M. N.

. 2017. “Treating Pigs: Balancing Standardisation and Individual Treatments in Translational Neonatology Research.” BioSocieties. doi: 10.1057/s41292-017-0071-2.

Daston

2009. “Science Studies and the History of Science.” Critical Inquiry 35 (4): 798–813.

Davies

2012a. “What Is a Humanized Mouse? Remaking the Species and Spaces of Translational Medicine.” Body & Society 18 (3-4): 126–55.

10.

Davies

2012b. “Caring for the Multiple and the Multitude: Assembling Animal Welfare and Enabling Ethical Critique.” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 30 (4): 623–38.

11.

Davies

G. F.

Greenhough

B. J.

Hobson-West

Kirk

R. G. W.

Applebee

Bellingan

L. C.

Berdoy

Buller

Cassaday

H. J.

Davies

Diefenbacher

Druglitrø

Escobar

M. P.

Friese

Herrmann

Hinterberger

Jarrett

W. J.

Jayne

Johnson

A. M.

Johnson

E. R.

Konold

Leach

M. C.

Leonelli

Lewis

D. I.

Lilley

E. J.

Longridge

E. R.

McLeod

C. M.

Miele

Nelson

M. C.

Ormandy

E. H.

Pallett

Poort

Pound

Ramsden

Roe

Scalway

Schrader

Scotton

C. J.

Scudamore

C. L.

Smith

J. A.

Whitfield

Wolfensohn

. 2016. “Developing a Collaborative Agenda for Humanities and Social Scientific Research on Laboratory Animal Science and Welfare.” PLoS One 11 (7): e0158791.

12.

de la Bellacasa

2012. “Nothing Comes without Its World. Thinking with Care.” The Sociological Review 60 (2): 197–216.

13.

Despret

2004. “The Body We Care for: Figures of Anthropo-zoo-genesis.” Body & Society 10 (2-3): 111–34.

14.

Druglitrø

2016. “Writing Radical Laboratory Animal Histories.” Nordic Journal of Science and Technology Studies 2 (1): 36–44. doi: 10.5324/njsts.v2i1.2135.

15.

Druglitrø

2017. “‘Skilled Care’ and the Making of Good Science.” Science, Technology, & Human Values. doi: 10.1177/0162243916688093.

16.

Friese

2013. “Realizing Potential in Translational Medicine: The Uncanny Emergence of Care as Science.” Current Anthropology 54 (S7): S129–38.

17.

Friese

Nuyts

. 2017. “From The Principles to the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act: A Commentary on How and Why the 3Rs Became Central to Laboratory Animal Governance in the UK.” Science, Technology, & Human Values. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243917743792

18.

Garner

J. P.

Gaskill

B. N.

Weber

E. M.

Ahloy-Dallaire

Pritchett-Corning

K. R.

. 2017. “Introducing Therioepistemology: The Study of How Knowledge Is Gained from Animal Research.” LabAnimal 46 (4): 103–13.

19.

Germain

P. L.

Chiapperino

Testa

. 2017. “The European Politics of Animal Experimentation: From Victorian Britain to ‘Stop Vivisection.’” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 64:75–87.

20.

Gill

Singelton

Waterton

. 2017. Care and Policy Practices Sociological Review Monograph. London, UK: Sage.

21.

Greenhough

Roe

. 2010. “From Ethical Principles to Response-able Practice.” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 28 (1): 43–45.

22.

Greenhough

Roe

. 2017. “Exploring the Role of Animal Technologists in Implementing the 3Rs: An Ethnographic Investigation of the UK University Sector.” Science, Technology, & Human Values. doi: 10.1177/0162243917718066.

23.

Haraway

, 2008. When Species Meet. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

24.

Hobson-West

Davies

. 2017. “Societal Sentience: Constructions of the Public in Animal Research Policy and Practice.” Science, Technology, & Human Values. doi: 10.1177/0162243917736138.

25.

Holmberg

2011. “Mortal Love: Care Practices in Animal Experimentation.” Feminist Theory 12 (2): 147–63.

26.

Home Office. 2014a. Code of Practice for the Housing and Care of Animals Bred, Supplied or Used for Scientific Purposes. London, UK: Home Office. Accessed January 25, 2018. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/388535/CoPanimalsWeb.pdf.

27.

Home Office. 2014b. Guidance on the Operation of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. London, UK: Home Office. Accessed January 25, 2018. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/operation-of-aspa.

28.

Johnson

2015. “Of Lobsters, Laboratories and War: Animal Studies and the Temporality of More-than-human Encounters.” Environment & Planning D: Society and Space 33 (2): 296–313.

29.

Kirk

R. G. W.

2014. “The Invention of the “Stressed Animal” and the Development of a Science of Animal Welfare, 1947-86.” In Stress, Shock, and Adaptation in the Twentieth Century, edited by Cantor

David

Ramsden

Edmund

, 241–63. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.

30.

Kirk

R. G. W.

2017. “Recovering the Principles of Humane Experimental Technique: The 3Rs and the Human Essence of Animal Research.” Science, Technology, & Human Values. doi: 10.1177/0162243917726579.

31.

Klein

H. J.

Bayne

K. A.

. 2007. “Establishing a Culture of Care, Conscience, and Responsibility: Addressing the Improvement of Scientific Discovery and Animal Welfare through Science-based Performance Standards.” ILAR Journal 48 (1): 3–11.

32.

Lynch

1988. “Sacrifice and the Transformation of the Animal Body into a Scientific Object: Laboratory Culture and Ritual Practice in Neuroscience.” Social Studies of Science 18 (2): 265–89.

33.

MacArthur Clark

2008. “A Global Vision for Laboratory Animal Medicine.” ALTEX 14:735–37.

34.

McLeod

Hartley

. 2017. “Responsibility and Laboratory Animal Research Governance.” Science, Technology, & Human Values. doi: 10.1177/0162243917727866.

35.

Mol

2008. The Logic of Care: Health and the Problem of Patient Choice. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

36.

Mol

Moser

Pols

. 2010. “Care: Putting Practice into Theory.” In Care in Practice. On Tinkering in Clinics, Homes and Farms, edited by Mol

Moser

Pols

, 7–26. Bielefeld, Germany: Transcript Verlag.

37.

Nelson

2016. “Model Homes for Model Organisms: Intersections of Animal Welfare and Behavioral Neuroscience around the Environment of the Laboratory Mouse.” BioSocieties 11 (1): 46–66.

38.

Noddings

1984. Caring: A Feminist Approach to Ethics and Moral Education. Berkeley: University of California Press.

39.

Russell

W. M. S.

Burch

R. L.

. 1959. The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique. London, UK: Methuen.

40.

Thompson

2013. Good Science: The Ethical Choreography of Stem Cell Research. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

41.

Turner

P. V.

Pekow

Clark

J. M.

Vergara

Bayne

White

W. J.

Kurosawa

T. M.

Seok

S. H.

Baneux

. 2015. “Roles of the International Council for Laboratory Animal Science (ICLAS) and International Association of Colleges of Laboratory Animal Medicine (IACLAM) in the Global Organization and Support of 3Rs Advances in Laboratory Animal Science.” Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science 54 (2): 174–80.

42.

Valverde

2003. Law’s Dream of a Common Knowledge. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

43.

Weisberg

2009. “The Broken Promises of Monsters: Haraway, Animals and the Humanist Legacy.” Journal for Critical Animal Studies 7 (2): 22–62.

44.

Würbel

2017. “More than 3Rs: The Importance of Scientific Validity for Harm–Benefit Analysis of Animal Research.” LabAnimal 46 (4): 164.