Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This article describes a study of attitudes to the current system of animal experimentation (for the production of health interventions) among 52 UK healthcare professionals. These healthcare professionals participated in three separate focus groups (of 18, 17 and 17 participants) and were invited to respond to the question ‘what is your opinion about the current system of animal testing?’ The study focused specifically on their views of the current system (rather than their views of animal testing in general). The healthcare professionals were critical of the current system, particularly with regard to regulation, secrecy, validity, unnecessary suffering and welfare.

Keywords

animal experimentation attitudes healthcare professionals

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Animal Aid (2006) Unhappy Anniversary: Twenty years of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. Tonbridge: Animal Aid. Available at: http://www.animalaid.org.uk/images/pdf/unhappy.pdf (accessed 11 May 2014).

Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 (section 24). London: HMSO. Available at: http://www.legis-lation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/14/contents (accessed 11 May 2014).

Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, Amendment Regulations 2012. London: HMSO. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/265691/Animals__Scientific_Procedures__Act_1986.pdf (accessed 11 May 2014).

Animal Welfare Act 2006 (section 58). London: HMSO. Available at: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/45/pdfs/ukpga_20060045_en.pdf (accessed 11 May 2014).

Bowling

(2014) Research Methods in Health: Investigating Health and Health Services (4th edn) Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill.

Brody

Dalen

Annett

. (2012) Conceptualizing the role of research literacy in advancing societal health. Journal of Health Psychology 17(5): 724–730.

Broughton

(2001) Seeing is believing: Cruelty to dogs at Huntingdon Life Sciences. The Ecologist 31(2): 31–33.

BUAV (2011) BUAV review of scientific publications concludes reporting of animal use and care and implementation of the 3Rs as wholly inadequate. BUAV Press Release, 9.03.2011. Available at: http://www.buav.org/_lib/userfiles/files/20110309-BUAV-reviews-3Rs-reporting-in-scientific-publ-ications-ATLA.pdf (accessed 11 May 2014).

Crossley

(2003) Would you consider yourself a healthy person?: Using focus groups to explore health as a moral phenomenon. Journal of Health Psychology 8(5): 501–514.

10.

Dignon

(2014) Health Care Professionals’ attitiudes to the current system of animal testing for health interventions: findings from a quantitative questionnaire. Manuscript submitted for publication.

11.

DOH (2012) Liberating the NHS: Developing the Healthcare Workforce from Design to Delivery. London: HMSO.

12.

European Union (2010) Sixth report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the statistics on the number of animals used for experimental and other scientific purposes in the member states of the European Union. Brussels: European Union. Available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52010DC0511R(01) (accessed 14 May 2014).

13.

Furnham

McManus

Scott

(2003) Personality, empathy and attitudes to animal welfare. Anthrozoos 16(2): 135–146.

14.

Gerrish

Lacey

(2013) The Research Process in Nursing (6th edn). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

15.

Glick

(1995) Animals for teaching purposes: Medical students’ attitude. Medical Education 29(1): 39–42.

16.

Gooden

Winefield

(2007) Breast and prostate cancer online discussion boards: A thematic analysis of gender differences and similarities. Journal of Health Psychology 12(1): 103–114.

17.

Greek

(2000) Sacred Cows and Golden Geese: The Human Cost of Experiments on Animals. London: Bloomsbury.

18.

Hackam

Redelmeier

(2006) Translation of research evidence from animals to human. The Journal of the American Medical Association 296: 1731–1732.

19.

Hagelin

Carlsson

Hau

(2003) An overview of surveys on how people view animal experimentation: Some factors that may influence the outcome. Public Understanding of Science 12: 67–81.

20.

Haugen

(2006) Animal Experimentation (Opposing Viewpoints). Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven.

21.

Heywood

(1990) Clinical toxicity – Could it have been predicted? In: Lumley

Walker

(eds) Animal Toxicity Studies: Their Relevance for Man. Lancaster: Quay Publishing, pp. 49–57.

22.

Home Office (2013) Annual Statistics of Scientific Procedures on Living Animals. London: HMSO. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/212610/spanimals12.pdf (accessed 12 May 2014).

23.

Home Office (2014) Consultation on the Review of Section 24 of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. London: HMSO. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/307830/Section24ASPAconsultation.pdf (accessed 12 May 2014).

24.

Hunnicutt

(2013) Animal Experimentation – At Issue. Detroit, MI: Greenhaven.

25.

Ipsos MORI (2006) Survey for the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI): Views on Animal Experimentation. London: Ipsos MORI. Available at: http://www.ipsos-mori.com/Assets/Docs/Archive/Polls/dti.pdf (accessed 13 May 2014).

26.

Ipsos MORI (2010) Survey for the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS): Views on the Use of Animals in Scientific Research. London: Ipsos MORI. Available at: http://www.ipsos-mori.com/DownloadPublication/1343_sri-views-on-animal-experimentation-2010.pdf (accessed 13 May 2014).

27.

Ipsos MORI (2012) Survey for the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS): Views on the Use of Animals in Scientific Research. London: Ipsos MORI. Available at: http://www.ipsos-mori.com/DownloadPublication/1512_sriBIS_animal_research_2012_final_report_September_published_final.pdf (accessed 13 May 2014).

28.

Jowett

Peel

Shaw

(2012) Sex and diabetes: A thematic analysis of gay and bisexual men’s accounts. Journal of Health Psychology 17(3): 409–418.

29.

Kellert

(1980) American attitudes to and knowledge of animals: An update. International Journal of the Study of Animal Problems 1: 87–119.

30.

Lander

Graham-Pole

(2008) Love medicine for the dying and their caregivers: The body of evidence. Journal of Health Psychology 13(2): 201–212.

31.

Ormandy

Schuppli

(2014) Public attitudes towards animal research. Animals 4(3): 391–408.

32.

Peachey

(2014) Animal rights group ends 15 year campaign against experiments at Huntington. Independent Newspaper, 24 August. Available at: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/animal-rights-group-ends-15year-campaign-against-experiments-at-huntingdon-9687843.html (accessed 30 Sep 2014).

33.

Perel

Roberts

Sena

. (2007) Comparison of treatment effects between animal experiments and clinical trials: Systematic review. British Medical Journal 334: 197–200.

34.

Press Association (2014) Animal rights activists jailed for six years for Huntington Life Sciences plot. The Guardian, 17 April. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/apr/17/animal-rights-activist-jailed-six-years-huntington-life-sciences-debbie-vincent (accessed 30 Sep 2014).

35.

Royal College of Nursing (2012) RCN Fact Sheet, Nurse Prescribing in the UK. London: Royal College of Nursing.

36.

Sackett

Straus

Richardson

. (2000) Evidence-Based Medicine: How to Practice and Teach EBM. London: Churchill Livingstone.

37.

Serpell

(2004) Factors influencing human attitudes to animals and their welfare. Animal Welfare 13: 145–151.

38.

Straus

Richardson

Glasziou

. (2011) Evidence-Based Medicine: How to Practice and Teach EBM (4th edn). Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone.

39.

Sullivan

(2003) Gendered cybersupport: A thematic analysis of two online cancer support groups. Journal of Health Psychology 8(1): 83–104.

40.

Swami

Furnaham

Chrisptopher

(2008) Free the animals? Investigating attitudes toward animal testing in Britain and the United States. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 49:269–276.

41.

Taylor

(2010) Reporting the implementation of the Three Rs in European primate and mouse research papers: Are we making progress? Alternatives to Laboratory Animals 38: 495–517.

42.

The Economist (2011) Animal-rights protests: A beastly business: Peaceful protests against animal testing are on the rise. The Economist, 22 October. Available at: http://www.economist.com/node/21533451 (accessed 30 Sep 2014).

43.

The Scientific Committee on Health and Environment Risks (SCHER) (2009) The need for non-human primates in biomedical research, production and testing of products and devices. Brussels: European Union. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_risk/committees/04_scher/docs/scher_o_110.pdf (accessed 13 May 2014).

44.

Widdicombe

(2014) Animal testing should not be shrouded in secrecy. We need real reform now. The Guardian, 17 May. Avaialble at: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/17/animal-testing-secrecy-reform-scientific-experiments (accessed 30 Sep 2014).

45.

Wilkinson

(1998) Focus groups in health research: Exploring the meanings of health and illness. Journal of Health Psychology 3(3): 329–348.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.11 MB

‘I think it will eventually be done away with’: Attitudes among healthcare professionals towards the current system of animal experimentation

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material