The balancing act between ethics and necessity has proven itself
to be a touchy subject in the world of animal research at UCLA over
the past few months.
While the university consistently points to many positive
medical advances that have developed from the use of animal
research on campus, and university spokesmen say it follows
stringent regulations, protests and activity by animal rights
activist groups have risen in intensity beginning this last
summer.
Research coordinator Emmanuel Masongsong, a vegan, faced a
quandary involving these two standpoints on animal research earlier
this year at his job at UCLA.
Related Stories
Masongsong, a UCLA alumnus, disagrees with the use of animals in
research on ethical grounds, personally abstaining as much as
possible from eating or using animal products.
But at the beginning of the summer, the research team he works
with began attempts to trace the growth of a cancer-causing virus
in human tissues implanted in host mice.
The potential implications he believes the research could have
for health worldwide, including preventing cervical cancer, led
Masongsong to choose to assist his team despite his personal
disagreement with the principles of animal research.
“There’s really no other avenue at this point that
would allow us to correctly investigate the characteristics of the
virus that we need to, and I just have to live with that,”
Masongsong said.
The research
Research involving the development of the artificial heart, gene
therapy for cancer, a tuberculosis vaccine and radiation therapy
have been cited in UCLA press releases as examples of the benefits
of animal research taking place at the university.
Masongsong is currently involved in a research project
affiliated with the Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center at UCLA,
which includes infecting human tissues in mice with the human
papilloma virus type 16, then killing the mice in order to analyze
their tissues.
Related Documents
- UCLA’s
Policy 990, which governs regulations regarding animals used in
research
UCLA’s most recent approval letter from the accreditation
committee
As a vegan, his involvement in the research has been limited at
his own request to aspects outside the lab, such as sample
processing and DNA extraction, Masongsong said.
Those who disagree with animal research should understand that
“not all animal researchers are doing it just because
it’s easy or just because they’re not trying hard
enough,” Masongsong said.
Sometimes research really does require animals in order to move
forward, he said.
The team decided to engage in animal research in order to more
fully understand the molecular basis of how the virus interacts
with the immune system, Masongsong said.
The use of SCID mice, rodents born without immune systems,
allows researchers to trace the life cycle of the virus without
interference from outside pathogens.
Rodents are used for approximately 95 percent of animal research
projects at UCLA, said Phil Hampton, spokesman for UCLA.
Aside from rodents, rabbits are commonly used, particularly in
studies involving antibiotic probes, said William McBride. McBride
is chairman of the UCLA Animal Research Committee, the body
regulating animal research at the university
“Rabbits are very useful because they are obviously a lot
larger than a … rat,” McBride said, noting that zebra fish
are also used in animal research at UCLA.
Less than 1 percent of animal research at UCLA is conducted on
primates, Hampton said.
McBride said the research that is conducted at UCLA involving
primates is mostly behavioral.
“It’s certainly a misconception that people have
that these animals are used for bizarre experiments,” he
said.
Law and compliance
As a research university, UCLA is committed to pursuing animal
research on its campus because such research allows advances
leading to breakthroughs in medical knowledge to continue to be
possible, said acting Chancellor Norman Abrams in a statement
released in August.
No research is done on animals if it can be done another way,
and researchers try to take excellent care of their research
subjects, said Roberto Peccei, vice chancellor for research.
“It is in the interest of the investigator to try and
treat their animals in the best possible way,” Peccei
said.
In rodent studies involving tumor growth, for instance, there is
a maximum size to which tumors are allowed to grow, and if there is
a pattern of animals having overly large tumors, the research will
be stopped, Peccei said.
Approximately 10 research cases every year have a problem with
the care of their animals, which amount to about 1 percent of the
research projects taking place at UCLA. The most common problems
are usually large tumors on animals being used for cancer research
and animals getting off their feeding schedule, Peccei said.
McBride said pictures that animal rights activists show claiming
they prove abuse of research subjects are about 40 years old, from
a time before the Animal Welfare Act or any other regulations on
animal research.
Animal research projects are subject to multiple regulations and
approvals before they are allowed to proceed at UCLA.
All animal research that takes place in the United States is
regulated by the Animal Welfare Act, the only federal law in the
country regulating the treatment of animals in research and setting
the minimum acceptable standard for treatment of such animals. It
is enforced by the United States Department of Agriculture.
The act defines “animals” as any live or dead dog,
cat, nonhuman primate, guinea pig, hamster, rabbit and wild animal
species intended for use in animal research. According to the UCLA
Animal Care and Use Training Manual, it does not cover farm
animals, birds or laboratory rats and mice.
UCLA also enforces multiple voluntary recommendations regarding
animal research, McBride said.
All of the scientists who investigate animals at UCLA must have
their proposed project approved by the Animal Research Committee,
which then monitors the project for its duration, McBride said.
A desire for transparency
Taimie Bryant, a professor at the UCLA School of Law who
specializes in animal law, said the Animal Welfare Act is not
enough to ensure proper treatment of animals.
Bryant believes more transparency of UCLA research procedures is
the only way the university can assure the public that its animal
research practices are in line with ethics as well as law.
“I think you could write a whole article about the secrecy
surrounding animal research at UCLA,” Bryant said.
Aside from the Animal Welfare Act and what information is
requested through the California Public Records Act, researchers
are not subject to any accountability, Bryant said.
This particularly holds true to disclosure of animal research
practices to the general population.
“There’s no law that requires them to make their
approach, their protocol, their practices known to the
public,” Bryant said.
She believes part of the reason there has been such a spate of
extreme activity by animal activists lies in the lack of any law
requiring animal researchers to disclose their activity to the
public.
“I find it discrediting that they won’t participate
in any discussion,” Bryant said, adding that researchers
should talk about the value and actual protocol of the research
they do if they think it is legitimate science.
A new direction for activists
Animal research at UCLA has recently been brought to the
forefront of public attention because of escalating protests by
animal rights activists, some of which have taken violent
turns.
The home of Lynn Fairbanks, a professor of psychiatry and
behavioral sciences who has published multiple articles on the
social interactions of vervet monkeys, was the target of an
attempted firebombing in June by the Animal Liberation Front.
The FBI classified the incident as a terrorist attack.
The Animal Liberation Front accused Fairbanks of conducting
painful addiction experiments on monkeys in a posting to the Web
site North American Animal Liberation Press Office.
ALF accusations saying Fairbanks abused primates are
“rubbish, absolute rubbish,” McBride said.
Another North American Animal Liberation Press Office release
accused Dario Ringach, associate professor of neuroscience, of
paralyzing macaque monkeys before gluing coils to their eyes.
The release said Ringach sent an e-mail in August to the press
office saying, “You win. Effective immediately, I am no
longer doing animal research.”
The release also said that the e-mail requested that animal
rights groups leave Ringach’s family alone.
The research Ringach was doing was very useful, but he was
concerned for the safety of his family, Peccei said.
Acting Chancellor Norman Abrams announced in August that, in
response to the increase in the number of illegal and often violent
acts by animal rights activists, the university would be
investigating potential legal action.
The statement also said UCLA would implement new security
measures to protect faculty and their families.
But in a Sept. 8 interview, Abrams said no legal steps had yet
been taken against activists.
On Sunday, the El Segundo home of a software businessman named
Brian J. Malone was targeted as a protest site by animal rights
activists.
Malone, who was not at home but was informed of the incident by
a friend watching his house, said people picketed his entire block,
handing out fliers to his neighbors and using megaphones.
A post-graduate researcher at UCLA is also named Brian
Malone.
The businessman said he thinks he may have been mistaken for the
researcher, and is now worried about potential vandalism to his
house.
“I’ve got a bunch of neighbors thinking that
I’m a monkey killer,” Malone said.
Nonviolent activism
Some animal rights activists say the recent activities at UCLA
by extremist activist groups have made their own efforts toward
ethical treatment of animals less well-received.
The attempted bombing has made an open dialogue about animal
research difficult, said Kristy Anderson, a fourth-year geography
and environmental studies student and president of the UCLA student
group Students for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.
And Michael Budkie, the director of Stop Animal Exploitation
NOW! believes UCLA is using the recent attempted firebombing of a
researcher’s house to mischaracterize all animal rights
activity as terrorism.
Many of the people who attended an animal rights protest march
on campus Monday were involved with Budkie’s
organization.
In an effort to do away with what she perceives as an impression
of all animal rights activists as terrorists, Anderson said she is
concentrating her efforts this year on meeting with campus
administration to directly relay her concerns. She feels this has
gotten more results than have past activities she has participated
in, such as protesting.
“We want to get the message across that not everyone who
cares about animals is an extremist or terrorist,” Anderson
said.
Anderson met with Peccei twice over the summer to discuss items
of concern to the group, including potentially implementing a
policy allowing freedom of choice for dissection in classroom
situations, Anderson said.
“I feel more effective in this way,” Anderson
said.
With reports by Saba Riazati and Sara Taylor, Bruin senior
staff.