Changing AttitudesBy Prof. dr. L.F.M. van Zutphen Worldwide the use of animals for research and testing is decreasing. In The Netherlands, this decrease was more than 40% over the past 15 years. During this period, the position of the experimental animals has gradually changed. The intrinsic value (as opposed to instrumental value) is more widely recognized. Also, my perception is that the Three Rs of Russell and Burch have generally been adopted now as guiding principles for designing animal experiments. Synergism of several synchronous developments has contributed to this change, but a major role should probably be attributed to education. In The Netherlands, every young scientist who is planning a career in biomedical research involving the use of animals must take a three week course in laboratory animal science. This course contains all aspects of responsible animal experimentation including ethics, animal welfare aspects and the use of alternatives. Lecturers at the course are established investigators, but representatives of animal protection societies are also invited to present their views on animal experimentation and discuss the pros and cons of animal use with the participants of the course. Since 1985 more than 3000 students have taken this course, which implies that a generation of young scientists has become familiar with the Three Rs and more importantly have learned to implement these principles in the daily practice of research and to appreciate the open dialogue with representatives of animal protection movements. In addition to education there have been at least two other developments with a major influence on animal use. One is that each institute with a licence for animal experimentation has been forced by law to appoint a veterinarian or other competent person as animal welfare officer. This person must have completed a one-year post graduate course in laboratory animal science. The work of animal welfare officers has proven to be of invaluable importance in preventing the performance of less carefully planned experiments, in refining experimental techniques, in the implementation of alternative procedures and in improving the welfare of the animals that are still being used for experiments. The other development with major impact on animal use is the establishment of animal experimentation committees. These committees do exist now for more than ten years. Their main task is to evaluate whether or not the benefit of the experiment outweighs the suffering of the animals. Although the difficulty of this evaluation is fully recognized, it is seen as an indispensable instrument in stimulating the scientist to take the ethical aspects sufficiently into consideration when preparing a protocol for an animal experiment. All these developments have also worked to level the barriers that exist in considering the introduction of alternatives to animal experiments. It is an increasingly common phenomenon that researchers are actively searching for alternatives that can replace or reduce animals in their experiments before starting their work and that measurements are taken that can improve the welfare or reduce the suffering of animals. The recent establishment of the National Center for Alternatives (NCA) and the Utrecht Center for Animal Welfare (UCAW) reflects the strength of the changing attitudes towards animals and will, in turn, further stimulate these developments. Although much has been achieved and the position of the experimental animal has been improved substantially over the past 15 years, this does not mean that it is time now for resting on the laurels. Much research is still needed, e.g. for the development of new alternatives and the validation of existing alternative testing methods or for the development of procedures that can further reduce or refine animal use. Fifteen years ago, The Center for Alternatives to Animal Testing was established at Johns Hopkins School of Public Health. Initially, the Center focused on the introduction of alternatives for toxicity testing, but its scope has gradually widened. Six years ago, Alan M. Goldberg, director of CAAT, came to the Department of Laboratory Animal Science in Utrecht to discuss if, in a combined effort, we could start organizing a series of world congresses on alternatives covering several aspects of the life sciences. The first World Congress on Alternatives and Animal Use in the Life Sciences was held in November 1993 in Baltimore. The second World Congress in 1996 is in Utrecht. As the first World Congress in Baltimore, the Utrecht Congress will also provide an excellent source of inspiration for establishing collaborations and starting new initiatives that contribute to the further decrease of animal use and to the improvement of the position of the animals that still are being used in the life sciences. Dr. van Zutphen is in the Department of Laboratory Animal Science, Utrecht University. | 
