Abstract
The use of some nonhuman primates in invasive research—unlike that on animals more generally—has been severely restricted or banned in much of the world. This trend toward severe restrictions or bans raises the question: Has the time come to end invasive research with all primates? In this chapter, we offer an overview of the main ethical questions surrounding the use of primates in invasive research, evaluate some of the leading arguments in favor of and against such research, and propose some ethical recommendations for conducting this research. As we argue, the case for phasing out the use of primates in invasive research is not as straightforward as some might think. Stringent restrictions must be adopted if scientifically and ethically justifiable invasive research with primates is to continue.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
We will understand ‘invasive research’ as research that is potentially harmful and not primarily aimed at benefiting the individual animal. Thus, veterinary research that serves a therapeutic purpose, as well as research that is purely observational (e.g., some behavioral studies) will be outside of our scope.
- 2.
- 3.
Arguably, some chimpanzees have even met the diagnostic criteria for post-traumatic disorder (Ferdowsian et al., 2011).
- 4.
Most Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees (IACUCs) may not actually be prepared for doing such maximally careful analyses (Carbone, 2020, p. 51). The allocation of more resources and the creation of specialized IACUCs to evaluate protocols that involve primates, might be needed to accomplish this goal.
- 5.
Note that moving directly from studies on lower animals (e.g., rodents) to studies on humans—instead of experimenting on primates as an intermediate step—has several drawbacks, including imposing a much greater risk on human research participants. Note, also, that studies may take longer to conduct or could be less controllable than studies on primates. See Phillips et al., 2014; Sughrue et al., 2009; Barnhill et al., 2016.
- 6.
It is controversial whether the harm of premature death should be assessed as ‘severe.’ In the case of great apes, however, studies that resulted in the death or euthanasia of them were forbidden even before research with great apes was phased out. Given the high degree of moral status that primates have, and in particular their capacity for self-consciousness, we believe that a similar position should be taken in the case of primates used in invasive research. But a detailed defense of this point is a project for another time. See McAndrew and Helms (2016).
- 7.
As we explain below, Beauchamp and DeGrazia admit exceptions to this principle. In our view, however, appropriately applying this principle to the case of invasive research with primates would leave outside the scope of ethically permissible invasive research with primates’ studies that involve severe and long-lasting harms.
- 8.
It is worth noting that they do acknowledge that in the case of the principle of Upper Limits to Harm, exceptions correspond to “rare cases of extraordinary urgent social need” (Beauchamp & DeGrazia, 2019, p. 20).
References
Abee, C., Adams, K., Amaral, D., Andersen, R., Ator, N., Bayne, K., Beauchamp, T., Bradberrry, C., Brown, P., Carbone, L., Clarke, C., Collins, F. S., DeLong, M., Dennis, J., Fazleabas, A., Flynn, J., Franchini, G., Goldberg, M., Grady, C., Haigwood, N., Hankenson, F. C., Hudson, K., Kahn, J., Kastner, S., Kirk, A., Lifson, K., McNicholl, J., Morrison, J., Meunier, L., Murry, C., Newcomer, C., Newsome, W., Niemi, S., O’Connor, D., Orwig, K., Platt, M., Porrino, L., Prentice, E., Foster, M., Rogers, J., Rosene, D., Schapiro, S., Shenoy, K., Strick, P., Wolinetz, C., Woodruff, T., & Zurlo, J. (2016). NIH workshop on ensuring the continued responsible oversight of research with non-human primates. Resource document. National Institutes of Health (NIH).
Aguilera, B., Perez Gomez, J., & DeGrazia, D. (2021). Should biomedical research with great apes be restricted? A systematic review of reasons. BMC Medical Ethics, 22, 1–20.
Anderson, J. R., & Gallup, G. G. (2015). Mirror self-recognition: A review and critique of attempts to promote and engineer self-recognition in primates. Primates, 56(4), 317–326.
Arnason, G. (2020). The emergence and development of animal research ethics: A review with a focus on nonhuman primates. Science and Engineering Ethics, 26, 2277–2293.
Arnason, G., & Clausen, J. (2016). On balance: Weighing harms and benefits in fundamental neurological research using nonhuman primates. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 19, 229–237.
Barnhill, A., Joffe, S., & Miller, F. G. (2016). The ethics of infection challenges in primates. Hastings Center Report, 46, 20–26.
Beauchamp, T., & DeGrazia, D. (2019). Principles of animal research ethics. Oxford University Press.
Beauchamp, T., & Wobber, V. (2014). Autonomy in chimpanzees. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 35(2), 117–132.
Beauchamp, T., Capitanio, J., Carbone, L., Conlee, K., Gruen, L., Hudson, K., Hutchinson, E., Kahn, J., Kordower, J., Landi, M., Peña-Guzmán, D., Redmond, E., Richmond, J., Schapiro, S., Tennenbaum, J., Zurio, J. (2017). The necessity of the use of non-human primate models in research. Resource document. Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics. https://speakingofresearch.files.wordpress.com/2017/04/animal-working-group-meeting-1-briefing-book.pdf
Begley, C. G., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2015). Reproducibility in science. Improving the standard for basic and preclinical research. Circulation Research, 166, 116–126.
Bhogal, N., Hudson, M., Balls, M., & Combes, R. D. (2005). The use of non-human primates in biological and medical research: Evidence submitted by FRAME to the Academy of Medical Sciences/Medical Research Council/Royal Society/Wellcome Trust working group. Alternatives to Laboratory Animals: ATLA, 33, 519–527.
Bobrowicz, K., Johansson, M., & Osvath, M. (2020). Great apes selectively retrieve relevant memories to guide action. Scientific Reports, 10, 1–13.
Bradley, A., Mennie, N., Bibby, P. A., & Cassaday, H. J. (2020). Some animals are more equal than others: Validation of a new scale to measure how attitudes to animals depend on species and human purpose of use. PLoS One, 15, 1–23.
Buffalo, E. A., Movshon, J. A., & Wurtz, R. H. (2019). From basic brain research to treating human brain disorders. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116, 26167–26172.
Carbone, L. (2020). The potential and impacts of practical application of Beauchamp and DeGrazia’s six principles. In T. Beauchamp & D. DeGrazia (Eds.), Principles of animal research ethics (pp. 45–60). Oxford University Press.
Carvalho, C., Gaspar, A., Knight, A., & Vicente, L. (2018). Ethical and scientific pitfalls concerning laboratory research with non-human primates, and possible solutions. Animals, 9, 1–17.
Cauvin, A. J., Peters, C., & Brennan, F. (2015). Advantages and limitations of commonly used nonhuman primate species in Research and Development of biopharmaceuticals. In J. Bluemel, S. Korte, E. Schenck, & G. F. Weinbauer (Eds.), The nonhuman primate in nonclinical drug development and safety assessment (pp. 379–395). Academic.
Chang, M. C., Hild, S., & Grieder, F. (2021). Nonhuman primate models for SARS-CoV-2 research: Consider alternatives to macaques. Laboratory Animals, 50, 113–114.
Conlee, K. M., & Rowan, A. N. (2012). The case for phasing out experiments on primates. The Hastings Center Report, 31, 20–26.
De Waal, F. (2019). Fish, mirrors, and a gradualist perspective on self-awareness. PLoS Biology, 17, 1–8.
DeGrazia, D. (2010). Great apes, dolphins, and the concept of personhood. The Southern Journal of Philosophy, 35, 301–320.
Directive. (2010). Of the European Parliament and of the council of 22 September 2010 on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes. Resource Document. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32010L0063&from=EN
European Commission. (2017). The need for non-human primates in biomedical research, production and testing of products and devices. https://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/non-human-primates-testing-2-background_en#fragment
Fanelli, D. (2018). Is science really facing a reproducibility crisis? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115, 2628–2631.
Feng, G., Jensen, F. E., Greely, H. T., Okano, H., Treue, S., Roberts, A. C., Fox, J. G., Caddick, S., Poo, M., Newsome, W. T., & Morrison, J. H. (2020). Opportunities and limitations of genetically modified nonhuman primate models for neuroscience research. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 117, 24022–24031.
Fenton, A. (2012). On the need to redress an inadequacy in animal welfare science: Toward an internally coherent framework. Biology and Philosophy, 27(1), 73–93.
Ferdowsian, H. R., Durham, D. L., Kimwele, C., Kranendonk, G., Otali, E., Akugizibwe, T., Mulcahy, J. B., Ajarova, L., & Meré, C. (2011). Signs of mood and anxiety disorders in chimpanzees. PLoS One, 6, 1–11.
Ferdowsian, H., Johnson, L., Johnson, J., Fenton, A., Shriver, A., & Gluck, J. (2020). A Belmont report for animals? Cambridge Journal of Healthcare Ethics, 29, 19–37.
Friedman, H., Ator, N., Haigwood, N., Newsome, W., Allan, J. S., Golos, T. G., Kordower, J. H., Shade, R. E., Goldberg, M. E., Bailey, M. R., & Bianchi, P. (2017). The critical role of nonhuman primates in medical research. Pathogens & Immunity, 2, 352–365.
Gardner, M. B., & Luciw, P. A. (2008). Macaque models of human infectious disease. ILAR Journal, 49, 220–255.
Grimm, D. (2015). Decision to end monkey experiments based on finances, not animal rights, NIH says. Science. https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/12/decision-end-monkey-experiments-based-finances-not-animal-rights-nih-says
Grimm, D. (2018). Record number of monkeys being used in U.S. research. Science. https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/11/record-number-monkeys-being-used-us-research
Grimm, H., Olsson, I. A. S., & Sandøe, P. (2019). Harm–benefit analysis—What is the added value? A review of alternative strategies for weighing harms and benefits as part of the assessment of animal research. Laboratory Animals, 53, 17–27.
Honess, P. E., Johnson, P. J., & Wolfensohn, S. E. (2004). A study of behavioural responses of non-human primates to air transport and re-housing. Laboratory Animals, 38, 119–132.
Jaworska, A., & Tannenbaum, J. (2021). The grounds of moral status. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2013/entries/grounds-moral-status/
Kagira, J. M., Ngotho, M., Thuita, J. K., Maina, N. W., & Hau, J. (2007). Hematological changes in vervet monkeys (Chlorocebus aethiops) during eight months’ adaptation to captivity. American Journal of Primatology, 69, 1053–1063.
Kaiser, J. (2015). NIH to end all support for chimpanzee research. Science. https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/11/nih-end-all-support-chimpanzee-research, 350, 1013.
Krupenye, C., & Call, J. (2019). Theory of mind in animals: Current and future directions. WIREs Cognitive Science, 10, 1–25.
Lilley, E., Armstrong, R., Clark, N., Gray, P., Hawkins, P., Mason, K., López-Salesansky, N., Stark, A., Jackson, S. K., Thiemermann, C., & Nandi, M. (2015). Refinement of animal models of sepsis and septic shock. Shock, 43, 304–316.
Matsuzawa, T. (2016). SAGA and GAIN for great apes. Primates, 57, 1–2.
McAndrew, R., & Helms, S. I. (2016). Laboratory primates: Their lives in and after research. Temperature, 3, 502–508.
Miller, R., Boeckle, M., Jelbert, S. A., Frohnwieser, A., Wascher, C. A. F., & Clayton, N. S. (2019). Self-control in crows, parrots and nonhuman primates. WIREs Cognitive Science, 10, 1–17.
Mitchell, A. S., Hartig, R., Basso, M. A., Jarrett, W., Kastner, S., & Poirier, C. (2021). International primate neuroscience research regulation, public engagement and transparency opportunities. NeuroImage, 229, 1–10.
Nakayama, E., & Saijo, M. (2013). Animal models for Ebola and Marburg virus infections. Frontiers in Microbiology, 4, 1–20.
National Institutes of Health. (2021). Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare Vertebrate Animals Section. https://olaw.nih.gov/guidance/vertebrate-animal-section.htm
Ogden, B. E., Wanyong, W., Agui, T., & Han, B. (2016). Laboratory animal Laws, regulations, guidelines and standards in China mainland, Japan, and Korea. ILAR Journal, 57, 301–311.
Phillips, K. A., Bales, K. L., Capitanio, J. P., Conley, A., Czoty, P. W., ‘t Hart, B. A., Hopkins, W. D., Hu, S. L., Miller, L. A., Nader, M. A., Nathanielsz, P. W., Rogers, J., Shively, C. A., & Voytko, M. L. (2014). Why primate models matter. American Journal of Primatology, 76, 801–827.
Prince, A. M., Goodall, J., Brotman, B., Dienske, H., Schellekens, H., & Eichberg, J. W. (1989). Appropriate conditions for maintenance of chimpanzees in studies with blood-borne viruses: An epidemiologic and psychosocial perspective. Journal of Medical Primatology, 18, 27–42.
Reardon, S. (2019, May 9). US lawmakers propose plan to reduce primate research at National Institutes of Health. Nature. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01511-0
Reynolds, V. (1995). Moral issues in relation to chimpanzees field studies and experiments. Alternatives to Laboratory Animals, 23(5), 621–625. 02300512.
Russell, W. M. S., & Burch, R. L. (1959). The principles of humane experimental technique. Methuen.
Schuppli, C. A., Fraser, D., & McDonald, M. (2004). Expanding the three Rs to meet new challenges in humane animal experimentation. Alternatives to Laboratory Animals, 32, 525–532.
Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks. (2009). The need for non-human primates in biomedical research, production and testing of products and devices. Resource document. SCHER. https://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_risk/committees/04_scher/docs/scher_o_110.pdf
Scientific Committee on Health, Environmental and Emerging Risks. (2017). The need for non-human primates in biomedical research, production and testing of products and devices (update 2017). Resource document. SCHEER. https://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/non-human-primates-testing
Shanks, N., & Greek, R. (2008). Experimental use of nonhuman primates is not a simple problem. Nature Medicine, 14, 1012.
Smith, D., Anderson, D., Degryse, A. D., Bol, C., Criado, A., Ferrara, A., et al. (2018). Classification and reporting of severity experienced by animals used in scientific procedures: FELASA/ECLAM/ESLAV working group report. Laboratory Animals, 52(1_suppl), 5–57.
Strech, D., & Dirnagl, U. (2019). 3Rs missing: Animal research without scientific value is unethical. BMJ Open Science, 3, 1–4.
Sughrue, M. E., Mocco, J., Mack, W. J., Ducruet, A. F., Komotar, R. J., Fischbach, R. L., Martin, T. E., & Connolly, E. S. (2009). Bioethical considerations in translational research: Primate stroke. The American Journal of Bioethics: AJOB, 9, 3–12.
Tan, T., Wu, J., Si, C., Dai, S., Zhang, Y., Sun, N., Zhang, E., Shao, H., Si, W., Yang, P., Wang, H., Chen, Z., Zhu, R., Kang, Y., Hernandez-Benitez, R., Martinez, L., Nuñez, E., Berggren, W. T., Schwarz, M., Ai, Z., Li, T., Deng, H., Rodriguez, C., Ji, W., Niu, Y., & Izpisua, J. C. (2021). Chimeric contribution of human extended pluripotent stem cells to monkey embryos ex vivo. Cell, 184, 2020–2032.
Tannenbaum, J., & Bennett, B. T. (2015). Russell and Burch’s 3Rs then and now: The need for clarity in definition and purpose. Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science: JAALAS, 54(2), 120–132.
Taylor, K., & Alvarez, L. R. (2019). An estimate of the number of animals used for scientific purposes worldwide in 2015. Alternatives to laboratory animals: ATLA, 47, 196–213.
Thew, M. (2012, April 11). Primate studies: Trials don’t always translate. Nature, 167.
US Department of Agriculture. (2021). Research Facility Annual Summary & Archive Reports. https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/animalwelfare/sa_obtain_research_facility_annual_report/ct_research_facility_annual_summary_reports
Varner, G. (2012). Personhood, ethics, and animal cognition: Situating animals in Hare’s two level utilitarianism. Oxford University Press.
Walker, R. L. (2016). Beyond primates: Research protections and animal moral value. Hastings Center Report, 46, 28–30.
Würbel, H. (2017). Importance of scientific validity for harm-benefit analysis of animal research. Laboratory Animals, 46(4), 164–166.
Zhang, X. L., Pang, W., Hu, X. T., Li, J. L., Yao, Y. G., & Zheng, Y. T. (2014). Experimental primates and non-human primate (NHP) models of human diseases in China: Current status and progress. Dong wu xue yan jiu = Zoological research, 35, 447–464.
Zimmer, K. (2018). As primate research drops in Europe, Overseas Options Appeal. The Scientist. https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/as-primate-research-drops-in-europe%2D%2Doverseas-options-appeal-64668
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank Javiera Farga for her help during the preparation of this manuscript. This work was partly supported by the Chilean National Agency for Research and Development (ANID) under Grant FONDECYT 11200897.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Aguilera, B., Perez Gomez, J. (2023). Is It Time to Phase Out the Use of All Nonhuman Primates in Invasive Research?. In: Valdés, E., Lecaros, J.A. (eds) Handbook of Bioethical Decisions. Volume I. Collaborative Bioethics, vol 2. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-29451-8_32
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-29451-8_32
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-29450-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-29451-8
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)