NIH should retire most chimpanzees from medical research, panel says

Hundreds of chimpanzees at NIH facilities should no longer be used as test subjects, the panel said, but 50 should be kept as a contingency, adding that all the chimps should be housed more comfortably.

|
Courtesy of Save the Chimps /PBS
Ron, featured in the film 'Chimpanzees: An Unnatural History', was born in a research lab and spent most of his life in isolation. Subsequently, he went to live at the Save the Chimps sanctuary in Ft. Pierce, Florida.

A senior scientific advisory panel at the National Institutes of Health, in a step toward phasing out the use of chimpanzees in federally funded medical research, has found "no compelling evidence" to support keeping hundreds of chimpanzees at NIH facilities and recommends that all but about 50 chimps be retired.

This small group would remain available as a contingency should some unforeseen disease emerge for which chimps would be the best stand-ins for humans. But they, along with the retirees, would be housed in facilities designed to more adequately accommodate the full range of normal chimp physical and social activities – from climbing, foraging, and daily nest-building to hanging out in sizable groups on branches high off the ground, according to the panel.

The panel also recommends ending 16 of 30 research projects involving chimpanzees that the NIH currently is funding. The largest proportional hit falls on biomedical research, one of three categories of projects. Six out of nine current biomedical projects would end.

The ultimate driver behind the recommendations: concerns about the value and ethics of using chimpanzees, biologically the nearest relative to humans, for physically painful and intrusive infectious-disease research.

If the 28 recommendations are implemented, the effort would represent "an historic step forward" in moving chimps out of the lab and into sanctuaries, says Kathleen Conlee, vice-president for animal-research issues at the Humane Society of the United States, based in Washington.

Even foes of federal legislation to greatly restrict the use of chimps and other "great apes" in biomedical research see merit in the new recommendations.

As a stand-in for humans, "the chimpanzee has played a very important role in the evolution of biomedical research," notes Frankie Trull, president of the National Association for Biomedical Research (NABR) in Washington, which fought against the Great Apes Protection and Cost Reduction Act of 2011, which died in December with the end of the 113th Congress.

But biomedical science has advanced, Ms. Trull continues. And keeping chimpanzees is expensive; chimps are not euthanized but must be cared for until they die naturally. Researchers have found alternative animal models for some of the kinds of studies that once centered on chimps.

Although NABR opposed the Great Ape Protection and Cost Reduction Act, the group is comfortable with the recommendations the NIH is now considering, Trull says.

The case for change and the steps to take came from the scientific community, she observes, adding, "scientists should determine what animal models should be used, not Congress."

Chimpanzees represent a tiny proportion of animals used in biomedical research. The overwhelming majority of animals used are either rodents or zebra fish.

The recommendations represent the outcome of a process that began at the end of 2010, when three US senators asked the US National Academies to examine the issue, as did the NIH. A year later, the National Academies' Institute of Medicine released its report.

The 86-page report released for comment on Jan. 22 was pulled together by a senior working group that the NIH gathered to turn the Institute of Medicine's report into specific recommendations.

If adopted, the recommendations would apply only to NIH-owned chimps and those used in the course of NIH-funded research. Of 670 chimps the NIH owns or supports, 219 have been retired. Some 282 are research-ready. Another 169 have been labeled "research inactive," a kind of bridge category between the first two.

By some estimates, another 350 chimps would fall outside the purview of these recommendations because they are owned either by private pharmaceutical companies or by universities.

Indeed, the Human Society's Ms. Conlee suggests the Great Ape Protection Act is likely to be reintroduced this year to broaden restrictions to chimps not covered by the new recommendations.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to NIH should retire most chimpanzees from medical research, panel says
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2013/0123/NIH-should-retire-most-chimpanzees-from-medical-research-panel-says
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe