WHY THE EU MUST END EXPERIMENTS ON PRIMATES

by David Martin MEP

On Wednesday (05 November 2008) the European Commission is expected to release its proposals for updating legislation (Directive 86/609/EEC) governing the use of animals in experiments in the European Union.

This is a prime opportunity to implement a clear plan for the replacement of all primates, our closest living relatives, in European research.

The latest EU figures show that 10,451 primates such as macaque and squirrel monkeys, baboons and marmosets were used in the EU in 2005 for research, drug development and safety testing. 3,125 primates were used in Great Britain alone last year. Shockingly, Scotland is the primate experimentation centre of the EU with more experiments conducted per head of population than in any other country. 952 primates (30.5% of GB total) were used in 1,213 procedures in Scotland in 2007.

The use of primates in experiments raises both ethical and scientific concerns, as highlighted by organisations such as Advocates for Animals.

Primates attract particular concern because their advanced cognitive skills and high-level social and behavioural repertoire mean they are capable of experiencing intense physical or mental suffering, which adds significantly to the case against using them in experiments. It remains impossible to capture and breed these sentient beings, transport them halfway across the world in some cases, and keep and use them in laboratories, without seriously compromising their physical and psychological health.

Because of the suffering they cause, it is not surprising that primate experiments engender serious and long-established concern to the general public. For example, over the last 10 years public opinion polls in the UK have consistently shown that the majority of people are opposed to experiments on primates. In fact, the results of the 2005 European Union (EU) official opinion poll showed that 82% of EU citizens believe we have a duty “to protect the rights of animals whatever the cost”. A resolution to end the use of primates in research and testing, presented at the Fifth World Congress on Alternatives and Animal Use in the Life Sciences, also in 2005, was signed by world renowned primatologist Dr Jane Goodall and 57 individuals and organisations from 19 different countries.

All experiments on animals are scientifically questionable as each species is genetically and physically different and cannot be used to accurately mirror another species. Using non-human animals to predict effects in humans can be misleading and even downright dangerous. A recent report by the St Andrew Animal Fund, the Dr Hadwen Trust and FRAME (member organisations of Focus on Alternatives), Replacing Primates in Medical Research, analyses the extent to which primate experiments have already been replaced by advanced non-animal alternatives, and describes how scientific progress in non-animal research methods have the scope to replace primates in medical research. The report (available online at www.advocatesforanimals.org) includes five case studies in different fields of research – malaria, cognition, stroke, AIDS and hepatitis C, where vaccines
and drug treatments have continually failed to translate from primate ‘models’ to humans. For example, more than 37 HIV vaccines that have been tested on primates have undergone clinical trials involving 17,500 human volunteers and they have all failed. The report recommends a targeted and timetabled strategy for replacement of primates in research in the EU, for the benefit of patients and primates throughout the world. More scientifically robust methods are urgently needed in order to improve patient care, prevent disease and raise ethical standards in research.

It is of course tax payers who foot the bill for the majority of procedures involving animals (not just primates) – of which 68 per cent in Scotland were carried out in universities/medical schools in 2007.

Experiments at The Queen’s Medical Institute, University of Edinburgh Centre for Reproductive Biology here in Scotland use primates. One such experiment included an investigation of changes in sex hormone receptors in the wombs of 42 marmosets. Investigators at the Queen’s Medical Centre in Edinburgh studied changes in sex hormone receptors in the wombs of these monkeys following removal of ovaries and other hormonal manipulations. The experiment was carried out because not enough was known about oestrogen and progesterone receptors in the marmoset womb – a study for curiosity to see if the animal is a useful animal model for human female reproduction, despite admitting reproductive species differences between women and female marmosets. The animals were killed prior to removal of their wombs.

In addition to medical research such as this primates are also used by contract testing companies in Scotland such as Inveresk Research.

The future lies not in imprisoning primates and experimenting on them, but in replacing animals with modern non-animal research techniques. Increasingly, technological and scientific developments are generating advanced alternative techniques to the use of primates, with the advantage of providing data directly applicable to humans.

There is a vast field of work that is based on non-animal scientific research and testing that is directly relevant to humans examples include: Gene-hunting tools to pinpoint and understand, in human populations, the importance of different genes in a range of illnesses; cell and molecular studies to understand disease mechanisms and the effects of vaccines and pharmaceuticals; ultra-sensitive analytical techniques, such as accelerator mass spectrometry, allowing safe, ethical, microdose studies of medicines in volunteers; advanced microscopic techniques for imaging and analysing human cell functions in health and disease; biosensors that synergise cell research with microelectronics, to study metabolism, toxicity and disease biomarkers; high-powered computer models that realistically simulate the human body and its component systems and organs, and their reactions to medicines; novel gene-silencing approaches to study specific gene functions in human tissues in the test tube; studies of post-mortem tissues bequeathed by patients to gain insight into cell-level changes in human illnesses; computational analysis of human data to understand the lifecycle of disease viruses in the human body; tissue engineering to re-create three-dimensional human tissues in the test tube, for disease research, drug development and safety testing; computer predictions of medicinal effects based on the structures of pharmaceutical molecules; and high-technology, safe imaging of the human brain to understand neurological disorders.

I and the majority of other members of the European Parliament have made our views in support of an end to experiments on primates clear. In 2007, the European Parliament accepted a resolution to end the use of great apes and wild-caught monkeys in experiments and for a timetable to replace all primate experiments with non-animal alternatives in the EU.

Funders of research and scientists themselves can help to bring about strategic change in the planning and conduct of medical research, so that out-dated and ineffective primate experiments continue to be replaced by modern non-animal techniques fit for the 21st century. Instead of having the shame of being the primate testing capital of the EU, it would be great to see Scotland leading the way in developing, promoting and using cutting-edge modern non-animal research methods.

I hope the European Commission will soon introduce legislation to ensure the replacement of primates in research in the EU. The moral and scientific cases for such a move are overwhelming. Such a move will help to avoid large-scale animal suffering, to enhance medical progress and to accelerate the development and use of novel, effective and humane scientific technologies. It will also set an example for other authorities to implement similar policies which will benefit patients and primates across the world.