Ethical Issues in the Use of Animal Models of Infection and Some Practical Refinements

  • David B. Morton
Part of the Infectious Diseases and Pathogenesis book series (IAPA)


Other chapters in this book have drawn the reader’s attention to the devastation caused by HIV infection, not only to the individuals concerned but also to their families and dependants. Moreover, there are direct effects on others in the community such as doctors, nurses, health workers and care givers and; as well as running the risk of themselves becoming infected, they are exposed daily to the harrowing tragedies of those afflicted by this disease. AIDS not only drastically reduces life expectancy of the individual, but also the quality of that life. In addition to these costs are the indirect costs that further burden a stretched national economy, particularly in regard to health care services, as spending on AIDS reduces unit resources for all those that are in the system. A choice between caring for someone with AIDS in their last few weeks or days of life, or saving the life of a newborn, or repairing a fractured bone, should never have to be faced, but it is in many countries on a daily basis. Set against this background how can some people value the lives of nonhuman animals to the point where they might want to restrict or even stop the use of animals to gain insights and cures for these HIV diseases?


Ethical Issue Nonhuman Animal Animal Suffering Laboratory Animal Resource Score Sheet 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Acred, P., Hennessey, T. D., MacArthur-Clarke, J. A., Merrikin, D. J., Ryan, D. M., Smulders, H. C., Troke, P. F., Wilson, R. G., & Straughan, D. W. (1994) Guidelines for the welfare of animals in rodent protection tests. A report from the Rodent Protection Test Working Party. Laboratory Animals 28, 1–8.Google Scholar
  2. AVMA (1987) Colloquium on recognition and alleviation of animal pain and distress. J. Amer. Vet. Med. Assn., 191, 1184–1294.Google Scholar
  3. Bayne, K. A. L., Mench, J. A., Beaver, B. V., & Morton, D. B. (2002) Laboratory animal behavior. In: Laboratory animal science ACLAM series (2nd ed., pp. 1240–1264). New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  4. CCAC (1998) Guidelines on: choosing an appropriate endpoint in experiments using animals for research and testing. Available from Canadian Council on Animal Care, Constitution Square, Tower II, 315–350 Albert Street, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1R 1B1. ISBN 0-919087-33-7. pp. 30.Google Scholar
  5. Cussler, K., Morton, D. B., & Hendriksen, C. F. M. (1999) Humane endpoints in vaccine research and quality control. In: Humane endpoints in animal experiments for biomedical research. C. F. M. Hendriksen & D. B. Morton (Eds.) (pp. 95–101). London: Royal Society of Medicine.Google Scholar
  6. Davis, H., & Balfour, D. (1992) The inevitable bond: examining scientist-animal interactions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Dawkins, M. S. (1990) From an animal’s point of view: motivation, fitness and animal welfare. Behavioural Brain Science 13: 1–61.Google Scholar
  8. Dawkins, M. S. (1992) Animal suffering: the science of animal welfare. 2nd ed. London: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
  9. Dawkins, M. S. (1993) Through our eyes only. The search for animal consciousness. New York: W. H. Freeman Spektrum.Google Scholar
  10. Dean, S. W. (1999) Environmental enrichment of laboratory animals used in regulatory toxicology studies. Laboratory Animals 33: 309–327.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Duncan, I. J. H., & Molony, V. (1986) Assessing pain in farm animals. Commission of the European Communities Brussels.Google Scholar
  12. Ellery, A. W. et al. (1985) Working Committee for the Biological Characterization of laboratory animals/GV-SOLAS. Guidelines for specification of animals and husbandry methods when reporting the results of experiments. Laboratory Animals 19(2): 106–108.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Festing M. F. W., Overend P., Gaines Das R., Cortina Borja M., & Berdoy M. (2002) The Design of Animal Experiments: Reducing the Number of Animals in Research through Better Experimental Design. Laboratory Animal Handbooks Series, 14.London: Royal Society of Medicine Press.Google Scholar
  14. Flecknell, P. A., & Waterman-Pearson, A. (Eds.) (2000) Pain management in animals. London: WB Saunders: pp. 147–60.Google Scholar
  15. Hendriksen, C. F. M., & Morton. D. B. (Eds.) (1999) Humane endpoints in animal experiments for biomedical research. London: Royal Society of Medicine.Google Scholar
  16. ILAR Institute of Laboratory Animal Resources (National Research Council) (2000) Humane endpoints for animals used in biomedical research and testing. ILAR 41(2).Google Scholar
  17. ILAR Institute of Laboratory Animal Resources (National Research Council) (2002) Implications of human-animal interactions and bonds in the laboratory. ILAR 43(1).Google Scholar
  18. ILAR/NRC Institute of Laboratory Animal Resources and National Research Council. (1992) Committee on Pain and Distress in Laboratory Animals: Recognition and alleviation of pain and distress in laboratory animals. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  19. Mellor, D. J., & Morton, D. B. (1997) Humane endpoints in research and testing. Synopsis of the workshop. In: Animal alternatives, welfare and ethics (pp. 297–299). L.F.M. van Zutphen & M. Balls. (Eds.) Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Elsevier Science BV.Google Scholar
  20. Morton, D. B. (1992, April 11) A fair press for animals. New Scientist 1816: 28–30.Google Scholar
  21. Morton, D. B. (1997) Ethical and refinement aspects of animal experimentation. In: Veterinary vaccinology (pp. 763–785). P.-P. Pastoret, J. Blancou, P. Vannier & C. Verscheuren. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science BV.Google Scholar
  22. Morton, D. B. (1998, June) The importance of non-statistical design in refining animal experimentation. ANZCCART Facts Sheet. ANZCCART News 11(2) Insert. ANZCCART, PO Box 19, Glen Osmond, SA5064, Australia.Google Scholar
  23. Morton, D. B. (1999) Ethical aspects of the use of animal models of infection. In: Handbook of animal models of infection (pp. 29–48). Otto Zak (Ed.). San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  24. Morton, D. B. (2000) A systematic approach for establishing humane endpoints. ILAR Journal 2000, 41(2): 80–86.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Morton, D. B. (2002) The importance of non-statistical experimental design in refining animal experiments for scientists, IACUCs, and other ethical review panels. In: Applied ethics in animal research. philosophy, regulation, and laboratory applications (pp. 49–178). John P. Gluck, Tony DiPasquale, F. Barbara Orlans (Eds.). West Layfayette, IN: Purdue University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Morton, D. B., & Griffiths, P. H. M. (1985). Guidelines on the recognition of pain, distress and discomfort in experimental animals and hypothesis for assessment. Veterinary Record 116:431.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Morton D.B., & Hau J. (2002) Welfare assessment and humane endpoints. In: CRC handbook of laboratory animal science Essential Principles and Practices (vol. 1., 2nd ed., pp. 457–486). Jann Hau and Gerald LVan Hoosier, Jr. (Eds.). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  28. OECD (2001) Environmental health and safety publications series on testing and assessment no. 19: Guidance document on the recognition, assessment, and use of clinical signs as humane endpoints for experimental animals used in safety evaluation environment directorate. Retrieved from Scholar
  29. Pakes, S. P., Yue-Shoung, L. & Meunier, P. C. (1984) Factors that complicate animal research. In: Laboratory animal medicine (pp. 649–665). J. G. Fox, B. J. Cohen & F. M. Loew (Eds.). San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  30. Paul-Murphy, J., Ludders, J. W., Robertson, S., Gaynor, J. S., Hellyer, P. W. & Wong, P. (2004) The need for a cross-species approach to the study of pain in animals. J. Amer. Vet. Med. Assoc. 224: 692–697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Poole, T. B. (1992). The nature and evolution of behavioural needs in mammals. Animal Welfare 1: 203–220.Google Scholar
  32. Reese, E. P. (1991) The role of husbandry in promoting the welfare of animals. In: Animals in biomedical Research (pp. 155–192). CFM Hendriksen & HBWM Köeter (Eds.). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  33. Russell W. M. S. and Burch R. L. (1959) The principles of humane experimental technique. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
  34. Ryder, R. D. (1975) Victims of science—The use of animals in research. National Anti-vivisection Society. Davis-Pointer Ltd. GB.Google Scholar
  35. Smith, J. A., & Boyd, K. (Eds.) (1991) Lives in the balance. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  36. Soothill, J. S., Morton, D. B., & Ahmad, A. (1992). The HID50 (hypothermia-inducing dose 50): an alternative to the LD50 for measurement of bacterial virulence. Internatl. J. Exper. Pathol. 73: 95–98.Google Scholar
  37. Townsend, P. (1993). Control of pain and distress in small laboratory animals. Animal Technology 44: 215–226.Google Scholar
  38. van den Heuvel, M. J., Clark, D. G., Fielder, R. J., Koundakjian, P. P., Oliver, G. J. A., Pelling, D., Tomlinson, N. J., & Walker, A. P. (1990). The international validation of a fixed dose procedure as an alternative to the classical LD50 test. Food Chemical Toxicol. 28: 469–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wallace, J., Sanford, J., Smith, M. W., & Spencer, K. V. (1990) The assessment and control of the severity of scientific procedures on laboratory animals. Report of the Laboratory Animal Science Association Working Party. Laboratory Animals 24: 97–130.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • David B. Morton
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Biomedical Ethics, Department of General Practice and Primary Care, Primary Care Clinical Sciences BuildingUniversity of BirminghamEdgbaston, BirminghamUK

Personalised recommendations