AAMC Reporter: October 2008

AAMC Revises Animal Use Policy

Related Resource

Amid increasingly violent opposition to the use of animals in medical education and research, including highly publicized attacks against scientists and medical school faculty, the AAMC Executive Council recently approved a revision of its policy on the use of animals at medical schools and academic medical centers.

The new policy continues to support the use of animal models in biomedical research and medical education, and calls on medical schools and teaching hospitals to treat animals in a "judicious, responsible, and humane" manner and make sure that animal care meets all relevant accreditation and regulatory standards.

"The AAMC strongly affirms the essential and irreplaceable role of research involving live animals in the advancement of biological knowledge, human health, and animal welfare," the policy states. "In addition, as animals continue to be vital in segments of the medical education continuum, the AAMC supports this use of animals to meet essential educational objectives."

There has been a sharp drop in animal use in undergraduate medical education, where animals are mainly used in physiology, pharmacology, surgery, and emergency room training. Public sentiment on the use of animals in medical education is far more contentious than it is for animal use in medical research. Due in part to aggressive advocacy campaigns by animal rights groups, only eight of 129 U.S. medical schools still use animals in their curricula, compared to about 90 in the early 1990s, according to various estimates. In addition, smaller species such as mice and fish are becoming more common in education, while larger animals like dogs and monkeys have lost favor.

"There is little doubt that animal rights campaigns have had an effect," said Tony Mazzaschi, AAMC senior director of scientific affairs and a coauthor of the new animal policy. "Deans, donors, and board members don't enjoy being harassed by animal rights activists. Plus, keeping an animal laboratory going is incredibly expensive. Simulators have gotten much better. The use of dogs, cats, and monkeys has plummeted in medical schools, while the use of rats, mice, and even smaller species like fruit flies has increased tremendously. So we're seeing many reasons for this reduction."

Some animal rights advocates said the policy does not go far enough.

"It's not a progressive policy," said John Pippin, M.D., senior medical and research advisor for the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, which opposes animal use in medical education. "Our position is to eliminate the use of animals entirely, and most schools have already done that. Those few schools that still do it are suffering from educational inertia. They have not caught up with modern discussions."

According to Pippin, rise in the use of simulators and other technologies have rendered animals virtually obsolete in medical education. However, some maintain that animal models are irreplaceable.

"A simulator is great for seeing the 3-D imaging and doing a lot of the practice, but it is not tissue, and it doesn't bleed, and the tactile sensation is just not the same as the real thing," said Julie A. Freischlag, M.D., surgery professor and surgery department chair at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and surgeon-in-chief at Johns Hopkins Hospital, where learners work with animal models once or twice a year in residency and during surgical rotations in medical school. "How does it feel to actually remove a gall bladder? It's a whole different feeling when it's not pretend, and you have to fix things quickly. It helps students find out whether surgery is their calling, and it helps them become better surgeons."

The new AAMC policy "strongly condemns" attacks on scientists, educators, and facilities by animal rights advocates bent on deterring or preventing the use of animals. The policy encourages medical schools to work with law enforcement officials to help protect against and respond to attacks. According to police, animal rights activists are suspected of firebombing the home and car of two University of California, Santa Cruz, scientists in August. No one was injured, although one of the scientists and his family were forced to flee their home through a second-story window.

According to the Foundation for Biomedical Research, which supports the humane use of animals in research, these kinds of incidents against researchers occurred 77 times in 2006, compared with 10 times in 2000 and once in 1981.

"This is a serious problem that medical schools need to give weight to,' said foundation President Frankie Trull. "They need to support the personnel conducting this research. There's a mentality among medical schools that it's a problem that will only happen to the other guy. But if you should ever become that other guy, it's certainly better to be prepared. The truly violent people and their supporters are a very small group, but these attacks are and will be on the increase unless there is a crackdown." Trull said that some areas of research may be more susceptible to attacks than others.

"The use of animal models in basic science is particularly vulnerable," she said. "The public has no idea what basic science is. So some in the animal rights community are capitalizing on this by saying that researchers torture animals for no good reason. There's a big educational challenge here."

Trull called it "wise" to allow continued animal use in medical education, within specific boundaries.

"There has been a shift away from animal models in medical education," she said. "But I think medical schools want to keep this option open to themselves. However, only humane and responsible animal models can be tolerated. Continued sound oversight is necessary." 

—By Scott Harris