Scientific merit review: the role of the IACUC.

Abstract

One of the most contentious issues facing each federally mandated institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC) is scientific merit review. To what extent, if any, should the IACUC review animal research proposals for scientific merit? Certainly, no reputable scientist would deny the validity of the ethical imperative that all animal research should be scientifically and ethically justified. In the past, however, scientists may have planned and conducted animal experiments in relative isolation with little pre- or post-experimental ethical accountability. The value and humaneness of animal research was generally assumed regardless of the source of funding and whether or not the research was reviewed by peers. The use of animals in research was largely a matter of individual conscience rather than discussion and debate. Contrary to the rhetoric of the animal rights movement, there is no evidence that this led to a significant amount of unjustified animal experimentation. Admittedly, there are cases of research with questionable merit and incidents of animal abuse in the name of science (Rowan, 1984), but these are extremely rare given the tremendous volume of animal research. Now, of course, researchers and institutions are not permitted to operate in an environment devoid of accountability for the humane care and use of laboratory animals.