Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Meeting Summary
  • Published:

Report of the Working Group on Animal Distress in the Laboratory

Lab Animal volume 35, pages 26–30 (2006)Cite this article

Abstract

Finding ways to minimize pain and distress in research animals is a continuing goal in the laboratory animal research field. Pain and distress, however, are not synonymous, and measures that alleviate one may not affect the other. Here, the authors provide a summary of a meeting held in February 2004 that focused on distress in laboratory animals. They discuss the difficulties associated with defining 'distress,' propose methods to aid in recognizing and alleviating distressful conditions, and provide recommendations for animal research conduct and oversight that would minimize distress experienced by laboratory animals.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. USDA APHIS AC. Policy #11: Painful and Distressful Procedures. USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Animal Care Policy Manuel. (1997) http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ac/policy/policy11.html.

  2. USDA APHIS. Proposed rule. Animal welfare; definitions for and reporting of pain and distress. Federal Register 65(132), 42304–42305 (10 July 2000).

  3. Plous, S. Attitudes toward the use of animals in psychological research and education: results from a national survey of psychologists. Am. Psychol. 51(11), 1167–1180 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Plous, S. Attitudes toward the use of animals in psychological research and education: results from a national survey of psychology majors. Psychol. Sci. 7, 352–358 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. National Science Board. Science and Engineering Indicators - 2002. (National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA, 2002).

  6. Stephens, M.L. & Conlee, K.M. The HSUS's Pain and Distress Initiative: overview and update. Altern. Lab. Anim. 32(Suppl 1), 423–427 (2004).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. HSUS. 2000. Taking Animal Welfare Seriously: Minimizing Pain and Distress in Research Animals. (Animal Research Issues Section, The Humane Society of the United States, Washington, DC). http://www.hsus.org/animals_in_research/pain_distress/ taking_animal_welfare_seriously_minimizing_ pain_and_distress_in_research_animals/index.html.

  8. National Research Council. Guidelines for the Care and Use of Mammals in Neuroscience and Behavioral Research (National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 2003).

  9. Dawkins, M.S. Using behaviour to assess welfare. Anim. Welf. 13(Suppl), S3–S7 (2004).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Morton, D.B. A systematic approach for establishing humane endpoints. ILAR J. 41(2), 80–86 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. WHO. WHO definition of health. www.who.int/about/definition/en.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the Kenneth A. Scott Charitable Trust for providing the necessary funding for this workshop.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Charles River Laboratories Foundation, 251 Ballardvale Street, Wilmington, 01887, MA

    Marilyn Brown

  2. University of California-San Francisco, Box 0564, UCSF Lab Animal Research Center, San Francisco, 94143, CA

    Larry Carbone

  3. The Humane Society of the United States, 2100 L Street, NW, Washington, 20037, DC

    Kathleen M Conlee,  Andrew N Rowan &  Martin L Stephens

  4. Department of Zoology University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford, OX1 3PS, UK

    Marian S. Dawkins

  5. Department of Animal and Poultry Science, University of Guelph, Guelph, N1G 2W1, ON, Canada

    Ian J. Duncan

  6. University of British Columbia, Animal Welfare Program, Faculty of Land and Food Systems, and W. Maurice Young Centre for Applied Ethics, University of British Columbia, 2357 Main Mall, Vancouver, V6T 1Z4, Canada

    David Fraser

  7. Canadian Council on Animal Care, 1510-130 Albert Street, Ottawa, K1P 5G4, ON, Canada

    Gilly Griffin

  8. Food and Drug Administration, CDRH/ODE/DCD/PVDB, 1350 Piccard Drive, Rockville, 20850-4307, MD

    Victoria A Hampshire

  9. Linacre College, Oxford University, 8 West Hill Street, Brighton, BN1 3RS, UK, UK

    Lesley A Lambert

  10. Department of Animal Science, University of California, Davis, 95616-8521, CA

    Joy A. Mench

  11. University of Birmingham, Biomedical Services Unit, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK

    David Morton

  12. The Home Office, Animals in Scientific Procedures, Allington Towers, Allington Street, London, UK

    Jon Richmond

  13. Department of Philosophy, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, 80523-1781, Colorado

    Bernard E Rollin

  14. University of Giessen, Institute of Veterinary-Physiology, Animal Welfare and Ethology, Frankfurter Str. 104, Giessen, 35392, Germany

    Hanno Würbel

Authors
  1. Marilyn Brown
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Larry Carbone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kathleen M Conlee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Marian S. Dawkins
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ian J. Duncan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. David Fraser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Gilly Griffin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Victoria A Hampshire
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Lesley A Lambert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Joy A. Mench
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. David Morton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Jon Richmond
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Bernard E Rollin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Andrew N Rowan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Martin L Stephens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Hanno Würbel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Brown, M., Carbone, L., Conlee, K. et al. Report of the Working Group on Animal Distress in the Laboratory. Lab Anim 35, 26–30 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1038/laban0906-26

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/laban0906-26

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing