Survey of Canadian Animal-Based Researchers' Views on the Three Rs: Replacement, Reduction and Refinement
Survey of Canadian Animal-Based Researchers' Views on the Three Rs: Replacement, Reduction and Refinement
复制标题
DOI：
10.1371/journal.pone.0022478
复制
发表时间：
2011-08-17
期刊：
影响因子：
3.7
通讯作者：
Griffin, Gilly
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Fenwick, Nicole;Danielson, Peter;Griffin, Gilly
“3r”原则（替代（replacement）、减少（reduction）、改良（refine））是加拿大和国际动物科学政策中被广泛接受的基石。加拿大动物保护委员会（CCAC）发起了这项基于网络的调查，以更好地了解“主要研究人员”和“其他研究人员”（即研究生、博士后研究人员等）对“三个r”的看法，并确定在加拿大继续实施“三个r”的障碍和机会。414名参与者的回答表明，研究人员目前并不认为替代的目标是可以实现的。研究人员更愿意使用足够的动物来确保获得高质量的数据，而不是使用最少的动物，如果在研究过程中出现问题，可能会浪费这些动物。许多人认为他们已经尽可能地减少了动物数量，并担心进一步减少可能会损害研究。大多数参与者对重复使用持矛盾态度，但表示担心这种做法可能会损害实验结果。在考虑改进时，许多研究人员认为，在某些情况下，动物不应该接受止痛药，因为它可能会影响科学成果，尽管进行动物福利相关试点研究的3r策略得到了大力支持，这被认为对动物福利和实验设计都很有用。与会者不反对在实施“三个r”方面获得“协助”，只要提供的意见是学院式的，并由被视为专家的个人提供。对于动物利用政策制定者来说，考虑需要采取哪些步骤使替代成为一个更可行的目标可能是有用的。此外，通过实施“三个r”为研究人员提供更大的实际和后勤支持的倡议可能是有用的。对“三个r”倡议的鼓励和财政支持可能会对“三个r”知识做出有价值的贡献，并改善用于科学的动物的福利。
The 'Three Rs' tenet (replacement, reduction, refinement) is a widely accepted cornerstone of Canadian and international policies on animal-based science. The Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC) initiated this web-based survey to obtain greater understanding of '`principal investigators' and 'other researchers' (i.e. graduate students, post-doctoral researchers etc.) views on the Three Rs, and to identify obstacles and opportunities for continued implementation of the Three Rs in Canada. Responses from 414 participants indicate that researchers currently do not view the goal of replacement as achievable. Researchers prefer to use enough animals to ensure quality data is obtained rather than using the minimum and potentially waste those animals if a problem occurs during the study. Many feel that they already reduce animal numbers as much as possible and have concerns that further reduction may compromise research. Most participants were ambivalent about re-use, but expressed concern that the practice could compromise experimental outcomes. In considering refinement, many researchers feel there are situations where animals should not receive pain relieving drugs because it may compromise scientific outcomes, although there was strong support for the Three Rs strategy of conducting animal welfare-related pilot studies, which were viewed as useful for both animal welfare and experimental design. Participants were not opposed to being offered "assistance'' to implement the Three Rs, so long as the input is provided in a collegial manner, and from individuals who are perceived as experts. It may be useful for animal use policymakers to consider what steps are needed to make replacement a more feasible goal. In addition, initiatives that offer researchers greater practical and logistical support with Three Rs implementation may be useful. Encouragement and financial support for Three Rs initiatives may result in valuable contributions to Three Rs knowledge and improve welfare for animals used in science.