This scenario poses several questions and concerns. Did Wright consider all options to protect the colonies and facilitate research? Could she be more flexible, or should she be more definitive? Did she need to involve the IACUC? Did the Institutional Official (IO) handle this situation appropriately? Does the IO have the ethics and political clout needed to act in this role as the IO? Does Wright report to the IO and have periodic discussions on veterinary care issues?
It is unclear whether Wright evaluated the health of the transgenic rats to be imported to determine whether the importation poses a risk to the existing colonies. The Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals1 indicates that veterinary medical staff should implement procedures for evaluating the health and, if appropriate, the pathogen status of newly received animals. Information from suppliers about animal quality should be sufficient to enable a veterinarian to establish the appropriate length of quarantine, define the potential risks to personnel and animals in the colony, determine whether therapy is required before animals are released from quarantine and, in the case of rodents, determine whether rederivation (cesarean or embryo transfer) is necessary to free the animals of specific pathogens. Wright should evaluate the health status of this colony and determine whether importing animals to Great Eastern University poses any risk to existing colonies. In this case, the animals' health status may be acceptable and an alternative to the standard quarantine process may be worth consideration. I would suggest that Wright work with Church to come to a solution that will assure the health of the rodent colonies and allow him to complete his research in a timely manner without unnecessary expense. However, if Wright determines that this importation is a risk to existing colonies, then she must take a stand because of her institutional authority and responsibilities.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution