Animal Models in Forensic Science Research: Justified Use or Ethical Exploitation?
3R’s
Animal experimentation
Animal models
Forensic research
Post-mortem studies
Journal
Science and engineering ethics
ISSN: 1471-5546
Titre abrégé: Sci Eng Ethics
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9516228
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 2019
08 2019
Historique:
received:
04
12
2017
accepted:
23
03
2018
pubmed:
3
5
2018
medline:
24
4
2020
entrez:
3
5
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
A moral dilemma exists in biomedical research relating to the use of animal or human tissue when conducting scientific research. In human ethics, researchers need to justify why the use of humans is necessary should suitable models exist. Conversely, in animal ethics, a researcher must justify why research cannot be carried out on suitable alternatives. In the case of medical procedures or therapeutics testing, the use of animal models is often justified. However, in forensic research, the justification may be less evident, particularly when research involves the infliction of trauma on living animals. To determine how the forensic science community is dealing with this dilemma, a review of literature within major forensic science journals was conducted. The frequency and trends of the use of animals in forensic science research was investigated for the period 1 January 2012-31 December 2016. The review revealed 204 original articles utilizing 5050 animals in various forms as analogues for human tissue. The most common specimens utilized were various species of rats (35.3%), pigs (29.3%), mice (17.7%), and rabbits (8.2%) although different specimens were favored in different study themes. The majority of studies (58%) were conducted on post-mortem specimens. It is, however, evident that more needs to be done to uphold the basic ethical principles of reduction, refinement and replacement in the use of animals for research purposes.
Identifiants
pubmed: 29717465
doi: 10.1007/s11948-018-0053-1
pii: 10.1007/s11948-018-0053-1
doi:
Substances chimiques
Anesthetics
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1095-1110Références
S Afr Med J. 2016 Sep 07;106(10):1051-1055
pubmed: 27725028
ILAR J. 2016 May 1;57(3):333-346
pubmed: 29117404
Gene Ther. 2004 Oct;11 Suppl 1:S64-6
pubmed: 15454959
Sci Eng Ethics. 2006 Jan;12(1):111-22
pubmed: 16501652
Clin Anat. 2016 Jan;29(1):19-24
pubmed: 26475721
Forensic Sci Int. 2012 Nov 30;223(1-3):64-71
pubmed: 22951222
ILAR J. 2016 May 1;57(3):324-332
pubmed: 29117398
EMBO Rep. 2007 Jun;8(6):526-30
pubmed: 17545991
Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 2015 Oct;24(4):420-30
pubmed: 26364777
Forensic Sci Int. 2016 Jun;263:74-82
pubmed: 27081792
Pathobiology. 2009;76(1):1-10
pubmed: 19188745
J Forensic Leg Med. 2016 Feb;38:6-10
pubmed: 26694871
Addict Behav. 2017 Jan;64:29-34
pubmed: 27540760
Leg Med (Tokyo). 2013 May;15(3):149-56
pubmed: 23312864
J Forensic Leg Med. 2013 Jul;20(5):489-95
pubmed: 23756520
BMC Med Ethics. 2017 Nov 29;18(1):66
pubmed: 29187190
Forensic Sci Med Pathol. 2016 Sep;12(3):343-9
pubmed: 27412160
Forensic Sci Int. 2013 Sep 10;231(1-3):409.e1-7
pubmed: 23683947
Lancet. 2009 Sep 19;374(9694):1011-1022
pubmed: 19709732
Forensic Sci Int. 2013 Dec 10;233(1-3):230-7
pubmed: 24314524
Sci Eng Ethics. 2016 Apr;22(2):549-65
pubmed: 26026966
PLoS Biol. 2010 Jun 29;8(6):e1000412
pubmed: 20613859
J Appl Anim Welf Sci. 2006;9(2):143-63
pubmed: 16956318
Contemp Top Lab Anim Sci. 2003 Nov;42(6):8-15
pubmed: 14615954
J Med Ethics Hist Med. 2009 Jul 30;2:12
pubmed: 23908726
Lab Anim (NY). 2003 Oct;32(9):37-41
pubmed: 15235662
Leg Med (Tokyo). 2003 Mar;5 Suppl 1:S76-8
pubmed: 12935557
Theor Med Bioeth. 2006;27(4):285-304
pubmed: 16937023
Philos Ethics Humanit Med. 2011 Jun 07;6:12
pubmed: 21649895