{"id":103456,"date":"2024-05-26T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2024-05-25T17:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/impe-qn.greensoft.vn\/news-events\/bioethical-approval-of-animal-care-and-use-in-research-part-2-end\/"},"modified":"2025-06-03T14:07:38","modified_gmt":"2025-06-03T07:07:38","slug":"bioethical-approval-of-animal-care-and-use-in-research-part-2-end","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/impe-qn.greensoft.vn\/en\/bioethical-approval-of-animal-care-and-use-in-research-part-2-end\/","title":{"rendered":"Bioethical Approval of Animal Care and Use in Research (Part 2‐End)\n"},"content":{"rendered":"

The Council on Ethics in Animal Care and Use must have a way to correct problems in animal care, including fair treatment of whistleblowers who report animal welfare violations involving animals protected by the USDA (United States Department of Agriculture.<\/strong><\/p>

Policy to Pause\/Stop Experimentation, or Experimentation on Animals<\/h2>

The Council on Ethics in Animal Care and Use must have a way to address problems in animal care, including fair treatment of whistleblowers who report animal welfare violations involving USDA‐protected animals.<\/p>

\"\"
Figure 4. The 12R principles model related to animal welfare analysis of research animals<\/figcaption><\/figure>

Check\/Monitor<\/h4>

IACUC operations are subject to inspection and oversight by multiple agencies. PHS staff and consultants may inspect any PHS‐certified individual at any time to verify compliance with PHS policies. USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) conducts unannounced inspections of facilities that use species covered by the Animal Welfare Act up to every six months. These inspections are intended to verify compliance with the Animal Welfare Act, a group of PHS policies that govern the IACUC. AAALAC inspects facilities for certification at least once every three years. Accreditation also requires annual reporting to AAALAC.<\/p>

Reliability<\/h4>

The central importance of the IACUC is that the care and use of animals is fundamentally dependent on the application of the provisions of the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals by the ethics committee of that institution. It has been argued that the measure of the success of the IACUC system is the reliability of protocol approval across different institutions. In other words, would an animal protocol approved by the IACUC at one institution be approved at another? This question was specifically addressed by researchers Plous and Herzog in 2001: Regardless of whether the study involved terminal or painful procedures, the IACUC protocol review did not exceed the random level of consensus between committees.<\/p>

The Plous and Herzog study has been criticized by some in the animal research community as invalidating the conclusions because IACUCs rely on the experiential knowledge of their scientists and staff. The Plous and Herzog study compared responses from internal IACUCs who knew the researchers and staff to those from blinded IACUCs who did not know the researchers and staff. Blinded IACUCs do not necessarily have expert knowledge of the species or procedures under review or of the forms used to submit the procedures, and the lack of agreement between unblinded and blinded IACUC ratings resulted in requests for additional information.<\/p>

In response, Plous and Herzog pointed out that the lack of reliability did not vary by animal species, that 17 protocols were explicitly rejected by the second committee even though 16 of them had been approved by the first committee, and that if reliable assessments can only be made when the reviewer knows the researcher or uses certain forms of protocol, then the assessment of the protocol should be reconsidered. A September 2005 audit report issued by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Office of Inspector General also raised issues with the reliability of the IACUC’s oversight. The document described the failure of several IACUCs to effectively review protocols and ensure compliance with federal animal welfare laws.<\/p>

Some IACUCs do not effectively monitor animal care practices, procedures, or alternative research methods. This situation exists because: (1) IACUCs are only required to conduct facility reviews semi‐annually; (2) IACUCs have high turnover rates; and (3) Some members are not properly trained. In very few cases, facilities fail to make changes, demonstrating disregard for APHIS regulations. As a result, facilities fail to conduct research in compliance with the AWA or, in some cases, fail to provide humane conditions for animals performing research. The Animal Care and Use Ethics Committee (IACUC) is particularly concerned with the care and use of animals for research purposes and is responsible for ensuring that all animal experiments comply with the guidelines of the National Advisory Committee for Laboratory Animal Research (NACLAR).<\/p>

Before a researcher can embark on an animal research project, they must first submit a completed IACUC application form outlining the research, the animal species to be used, the experimental procedures, the number of animals required, etc. for IACUC approval.<\/p>

SHaRe Shutdown and IMPACT ON IACUC REGISTRATION<\/h3>

CIRB has announced its intention to transition to the National ECOS (Ethics and Compliance Online System) in the first quarter of fiscal year 2024, and February 1, 2024 will be the final date for IRB applications. In preparation for the migration and shutdown of iSHaRe, the IACUC also needs to be prepared to ensure that IACUC operations will not be materially impacted.<\/p>

iSHaRe will be replaced by the Animal Research Ethics Review and Animal Facility Management system (also known as the “Animal Research Ethics and Information System” or “ARIES”). For more details on the transition of iSHaRe to ARIES, please refer to.<\/p>

SINGHEALTH IACUC APPLICATION PROCESS<\/h3>

Effective from 01 December 2023, all new IACUC applications must be submitted via the company’s official Email to the IACUC Secretariat at: iacuc@singhealth.com.sg.<\/p>

From 08 November 2023, all requests for amendments to approved implementation procedures, Project Updates and Final Project Reports must be submitted via the company’s official email to the IACUC Secretariat at:acuc@singhealth.com.sg.<\/p>

Harvard University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences (“FAS”) operates an Animal Care and Use Ethics Committee (IACUC) as required by the Public Health Service (PHS) Policy on the Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. Animals are maintained in accordance with the “Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals” (National Research Council, 8th edition, 2011) and all animal protocols must be approved by the IACUC before animals can be ordered.<\/p>

The Animal Care and Use Ethics Committee (IACUC) ensures that the highest animal welfare standards are maintained along with the conduct of accurate, valid scientific research through the oversight, coordination, training, guidance, and evaluation of all proposed projects involving the use of vertebrate animals at the University of Michigan.<\/p>

Standing Committee on the Care and Use of Animals in Research<\/h3>

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine will establish a new standing committee to provide a venue for the exchange of ideas and the sharing of knowledge among federal government agencies, the private sector, the academic community, and other stakeholders involved in animal research, research training, laboratory testing, biological testing, or related purposes or other special categories involving animals used for research. The activities of the standing committee will be used to inform any future updates or additions to the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (the Guide) and related products that will be produced by separate committees associated with this project.<\/p>

Specifically, the Standing Committee will:<\/p>