Driven by a combination of pedagogical, ethical and economic factors, the use of simulation technology and other alternatives to traditional training methods has become increasingly common in veterinary education as a means to teach basic and advanced concepts along with technical skills. When paired with wellstructured and supervised clinical training on animal patients, these modern methodologies help educators fill gaps left by conventional methods, reduce and replace the consumptive use of live animals, and ultimately result in the graduation of more confident and proficient veterinarians, veterinary technicians, and allied health personnel. This article surveys an array of the simulation methods currently available for veterinary education and how they integrate with and enhance standard curricula.
Simple SummaryThis study analyzed the membership of animal experimentation oversight committees at leading U.S. research institutions. We found the leadership and general membership of these committees to be dominated by animal researchers and the remainder of the committees to be largely comprised of other institutional representatives. These arrangements may contribute to previously-documented committee biases in favor of approving animal experiments and dilute input from the few members representing animal welfare and the interests of the general public.AbstractInstitutional Animal Care and Use Committees (IACUCs) were created to review, approve and oversee animal experiments and to balance the interests of researchers, animals, institutions and the general public. This study analyzed the overall membership of IACUCs at leading U.S. research institutions. We found that these committees and their leadership are comprised of a preponderance of animal researchers, as well as other members who are affiliated with each institution; some of whom also work in animal laboratories. This overwhelming presence of animal research and institutional interests may dilute input from the few IACUC members representing animal welfare and the general public, contribute to previously-documented committee bias in favor of approving animal experiments and reduce the overall objectivity and effectiveness of the oversight system.
Minimising the use of animals in experiments is universally recognised by scientists, governments and advocates as an ethical cornerstone of research. Yet, despite growing public opposition to animal experimentation, mounting evidence that animal studies often do not translate to humans, and the development of new research technologies, a number of countries have reported increased animal use in recent years. In the USA--one of the world's largest users of animals in experiments--a lack of published data on the species most commonly used in laboratories (eg, mice, rats and fish) has prevented such assessments. The current study aimed to fill this gap by analysing the use of all vertebrate animals by the top institutional recipients of National Institutes of Health research funds over a 15-year period. These data show a statistically significant 72.7% increase in the use of animals at these US facilities during this time period-driven primarily by increases in the use of mice. Our results highlight a need for greater efforts to reduce animal use. We discuss technical, institutional, sociological and psychological explanations for this trend.
Among the 28 member nations of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), a variety of training methodologies--including simulators, moulage scenarios, didactics and live animal laboratories-are used to prepare military medical personnel to treat injured civilians and soldiers. For ethical, educational, practical, and economic reasons, the necessity of animal use for this purpose has come into question. This article reports the results of a survey examining the prevalence of animal use in military medical training exercises among all NATO nations, finding that more than three-quarters of these countries do not use animals.
Justin R. Goodman, Casey A. Borch, and Elizabeth Cherry discuss public attitudes toward animal testing and its growing opposition.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.