Closing Discussion
To expand upon themes from the workshop and elicit additional perspectives, it closed with a wrap-up discussion featuring a subset of the speakers and planning committee members. Hatfield and Henegar moderated the discussion; panelists included Kwan, Bennett, Levin, Shriver, Navratil, Bajaj, and France. Panelists delved deeper into topics and examples that were raised during the workshop and responded to questions and comments from participants.
IMPROVING COMMUNICATION WITH THE PUBLIC
Social media is one avenue through which scientists and research institutions can improve communication with the public. Levin and Henegar said that using social media enables scientists to actively promote research involving animals to improve the public’s understanding of this work and provides the public with a platform to ask questions and learn more. France agreed, noting that a successful social media strategy is to make frequent, “bite-sized” posts that reflect research developments without getting bogged down in the nuances and complexities. She added that the level of institutional openness, amount of institutional support, and different audiences of each social platform can affect alignment among a scientist’s personal, laboratory, and institutional social media messaging.
Some members of the public hold strong views on research with animals and actively engage in public discourse, and others do not. Newsome asked Kwan to comment on particular considerations for engaging members of the public who do not have strong feelings about animals or science. Kwan replied that they may respond to reminders about the value animals bring to their lives, whether as companions, food, or livestock. Bajaj added that emphasizing the role of research with animals in developing disease treatments and cures can engage people, as everyone can relate to reducing illness and improving health. Maciejewski said that public education campaigns can also untangle complicated issues. Bennett agreed and pointed out that although the connection between animals and food is obvious, the connection between research with animals and health care could be made more concrete, perhaps through greater openness about its contributions in drug labeling. Levin added that research is often treated as the most controversial use of animals; using them for clothing or food seems to attract less debate.
Newsome asked about the relevance of One Health, the international and transdisciplinary approach to achieving sustainable, balanced, and optimized health for people, animals, and ecosystems, in discussions about the role of animals in research and the role of that research in improving health. Kwan replied that veterinarians are well positioned to be central in promoting One Health and reminding the public of the connections between research with animals and human and environmental health. Landi noted that One Health was originally called “One Medicine” and focused more on human health, although another participant added that medicine is only one aspect of One Health, which encompasses many interrelated scientific advancements, differing values, and group behaviors that are intertwined with public health.
Hatfield asked how veterinarians can join and influence public conversations around research with animals, and Brake replied that laboratory animal veterinarians can help to forge connections with other types of veterinarians, many of whom communicate with the public daily, by sharing how their work benefits animals and people. Veterinarians can also encourage owners to enroll their animals in clinical trials, reinforcing the connection between research involving animals and medical advancements, she noted. France agreed, stressing that research with animals is critical to veterinary medicine. She suggested that this connection could be made explicitly in not only veterinary school but also K–12 schools, to increase awareness of the diverse career paths within veterinary medicine. She also noted that Biomedical Research
Awareness Day is an excellent resource for creating such visibility and improving public awareness of the many roles of veterinarians.
ATTENDING TO ETHICS
Participants discussed a variety of ethical considerations and how scientists can attend to ethics when conducting and communicating their research. Shriver stated that ethics distinguishes between those who perform an action and those who are affected by it; in research with animals, humans are the agents. Some but not all people posit that humans’ unique cognitive abilities means that we have unique responsibilities as moral agents. He also mentioned the different views of speciesism, which is defined as making decisions purely on the basis of species membership. Some people repudiate speciesism, others espouse it, and different people point to different factors in making such decisions. For example, some draw a line between humans and other animals or between different types of animals, based on cognitive capabilities, the capacity to feel pain, or the ability to form preferences about the future.
Given the nuances of such ethical debates, Hatfield asked whether it is possible to effectively communicate about ethics within the context of the 8-second attention span that McKellips had noted. Shriver replied that despite a tension between academic examination of an issue and public perception of it, a quick statement emphasizing the value of the work can resonate with the public. Bennett suggested that scientists could briefly acknowledge that research with animals affects the public and invite them into an inclusive conversation about ethics, values, decisions, benefits, and harms. Kwan noted that her short description of her work is that she protects research animals because they need it: “At the end of the day, I know where I stand morally, and I know that animals will be used in research, and I want to be the one to protect them,” she said. Navratil added that it can be helpful to explain how scientists use information about animal anatomy and behavior to guide strategies for humane treatment that attends to the animal’s perspective. For example, cats and ferrets, which enjoy climbing, can benefit from vertical environments, and pigs are best approached from the side instead of the front because of how their eyes are positioned on the sides of their heads.
Newsome, Shriver, and Henegar suggested that it would be useful for veterinary schools to incorporate ethics in education across all levels to help create a shared language for effective conversations about the diverse ethical issues veterinarians may encounter. Shriver noted that teaching ethics can be challenging and suggested focusing on teaching students to think critically and enjoy the questioning process rather than attempting to impart specific values.
Kavita Berger, National Academies, pointed out that ethics and values vary both domestically and internationally and suggested that those differences could be incorporated into medical education, veterinary education, and public conversations about research with animals. Landi agreed, noting that different countries have their own animal care regulations, and added that international groups, such as the World Organisation for Animal Health, formerly the Office International des Epizooties, promote core animal welfare principles.
INCREASING OPENNESS ACROSS THE RESEARCH SPECTRUM
Returning to a theme from many workshop discussions, participants shared several ideas for increasing openness. Bajaj suggested that veterinarians could approach local journalists, who often struggle to find expert sources to explain scientific concepts, and offer to serve as resources for improving and increasing media coverage of research with animals. He reiterated that institutions that avoid discussion or ignore controversies to appear “neutral” run the risk of letting opponents control the conversation. Talking to the media brings risks, he acknowledged, but these risks are worth managing. Levin agreed that it would be helpful for institutions to be more open in how they engage with the media, although institutional leaders can be protective of their images, and some may be uncomfortable with scientists approaching journalists.
Yates suggested that the National Institutes of Health, which funds a great deal of basic and translational research, could take a more proactive approach in communicating about the benefits of research with animals. Navratil added that the private research industry could join academic scientists, who already communicate openly, to contribute to a more united front advocating for openness across the entire research spectrum, and Bajaj said that the U.S. Animal Research Openness Initiative and similar initiatives can play an important role in increasing openness. France suggested that scientists could consider initiating personal conversations about their work with family and friends; Yates agreed, noting that social movements often are built on personal communication.
WORKSHOP CONCLUSION
Huang thanked all those who took part in the workshop: the presenters, planning committee members, National Academies staff, and attendees. She summarized the topics addressed on Day 2 and noted the robustness of the discussions, particularly during the final Q&A panel discussion, when participants followed up on ideas introduced in the workshop. Huang concluded with the hope of continuing the conversation and further improving efforts to communicate effectively.
References
Am, H. F. 2017. PETA protests Yale researcher. Yale Daily News. October 11. https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2017/10/11/peta-protests-yale-researcher.
Americans for Medical Progress. n.d. Biomedical Research Awareness Day (BRAD). https://www.amprogress.org/biomedical-research-awareness-day-brad (accessed March 13, 2024).
Annas, G. J. 1985. Baby Fae: The “anything goes” school of human experimentation. The Hastings Center Report 15(1):15–17.
Bennett, A. 2013. A closer look at how animal research progresses from idea to study. Speaking of Research. https://speakingofresearch.com/2013/03/04/a-closer-look-at-how-animal-research-progresses-from-idea-to-study (accessed April 12, 2024).
Bennett, A. J., and S. Panicker. 2022. Elephants in the room: Openness in public vs. private research facilities in the U.S. Speaking of Research. https://speakingofresearch.com/2022/03/30/elephants-in-the-room-openness-in-public-vs-private-research-facilities-in-the-us.
Bennett, A. J., J. D. Bailoo, and S. Panicker. 2022. What Is failure? Shelved cancer treatment becomes first effective AIDS/HIV treatment. Speaking of Research. https://speakingofresearch.com/2022/04/28/what-is-failure-shelved-cancer-treatment-becomes-first-effective-aids-hiv-treatment.
Chukwu, M. 2017. Discovering why the caged bird sings. Yale Scientific Magazine. https://www.yalescientific.org/2017/04/discovering-why-the-caged-bird-sings (accessed March 13, 2024).
Cooper, D. K. C. 2012. A brief history of cross-species organ transplantation. Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) 25(1):49–57.
FBR (Foundation for Biomedical Research). 2022. 2022 Animal research poll data. https://www.fbresearch.org/polls/polls-2022.
Fillmore, H. A. 2015. The effect of daily internet usage on a short attention span and academic performance. PhD dissertation. Hochschule Mitweida University of Applied Sciences.
Goodall, J. 2010. In the shadow of man, 50th Anniversary of Gombe edition. Boston, MA: Mariner Books Classics.
Ipsos MORI. 2012. Views on the use of animals in scientific research. Ipsos. https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/views-use-animals-scientific-research (accessed April 8, 2024).
Krammer, F. 2020. SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in development. Nature 586(7830):516–527. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2798-3.
Lattin, C. 2018. Animal research myths, and the reality, Yale Postdoctoral Association. https://ypa.yale.edu/animal-research-myths-and-reality (accessed March 13, 2024).
Levin, L. H., and L. J. Muglia. 2022. Alternative thinking about animals in research. NAM Perspectives 2022. https://doi.org/10.31478/202211a.
Luntz, S. 2017. PETA harasses and intimidates scientist for trying to save birds. IFLScience. https://www.iflscience.com/peta-harasses-scientist-for-trying-to-save-birds-43665 (accessed March 13, 2024).
Mendez, J. C., A. L. P. Brook, R. J. Heppenstall, S. Mason, and A. S. Mitchell. 2022. Openness about animal research increases public support. Nature Neuroscience 25(4):401–403. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41593-022-01039-z.
NIAID (National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases). 2024. Antiretroviral drug discovery and development. https://www.niaid.nih.gov/diseases-conditions/antiretroviral-drug-development (accessed April 12, 2024).
NRC (National Research Council). 2011. Guide for the care and use of laboratory animals, 8th edition. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/12910.
Ringach, D. 2011. From science to miracle in 2 years: The discovery of insulin. Speaking of Research. https://speakingofresearch.com/2011/08/03/from-science-to-miracle-in-2-years-the-discovery-of-insulin.
Russell, W. M. S., and R. L. Burch. 1959. The principles of humane experimental technique. London: Methuen.
