Abstract
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.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baumans, V. (2004). Use of animals in experimental research: An ethical dilemma? Gene Therapy, 11, S64–S66.
Carbone, L., Guanzini, L., & McDonald, C. (2003). Adoption options for laboratory animals. Lab Animal, 32(9), 37–41.
Coelho, L., & Cardoso, H. F. V. (2013). Timing of blunt force injuries in long bones: The effects of the environment, PMI length and human surrogate model. Forensic Science International, 233, 230–237.
Curzer, H. J., Perry, G., Wallace, M. C., & Perry, D. (2016). The three Rs of animal research: What they mean for the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee and why. Science and Engineering Ethics, 22(2), 549–565.
DeGrazia, D., & Sebo, J. (2015). Necessary conditions for morally responsible animal research. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 24, 420–430.
DiGangi, B. A., Crawford, P. C., & Levy, J. K. (2006). Outcome of cats adopted from a biomedical research program. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 9(2), 143–163.
Elger, B. S., Hofner, M., & Mangin, P. (2009). Research involving biological material from forensic autopsies: Legal and ethical issues. Pathobiology, 76, 1–10.
Festing, S., & Wilkinson, R. (2007). The ethics of animal research. EMBO Reports, 8(6), 526–530.
Franco, N. H., & Olsson, I. A. S. (2016). Killing animals as a necessary evil? The case of animal research. In F. L. B. Meijboom & E. N. Stassen (Eds.), The end of animal life: A start for ethical debate (pp. 187–202). Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers.
Garret, J. R. (Ed.). (2012). The ethics of animal research: Exploring the controversy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Ghasemi, M., & Dehpour, A. R. (2009). Ethical considerations in animal studies. Journal of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine, 2, 12–15.
Heathfield, L. J., Maistry, S., Martin, L. J., Ramesar, R., & De Vries, J. (2017). Ethical considerations in forensic genetics research on tissue samples collected post-mortem in Cape Town, South Africa. BMC Medical Ethics, 18(1), 66.
Home Office. (2016). Annual statistics of scientific procedures on living animals Great Britain 2015. London: Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationary Office.
Ibrahim, D. M. (2006). Reduce, refine, replace: The failure of the three R’s and the future of animal experimentation (pp. 195–229). Chicago: University of Chicago Legal Forum.
Kasper, J., Mumm, R., & Ruther, J. (2012). The composition of carcass volatile profiles in relation to storage time and climate conditions. Forensic Science International, 223, 64–71.
Kaw, A. N. U., Jones, D. G., & Zhang, M. (2016). The use of animal tissues alongside human tissue: Cultural and ethical considerations. Clinical Anatomy, 29, 19–24.
Kilkenny, C., Browne, W. J., Cuthill, I. C., Emerson, M., & Altman, D. G. (2010). Improving bioscience research reporting: The ARRIVE guidelines for reporting animal research. PLoS Biology, 8(6), e1000412.
Kolar, R. (2006). Animal experimentation. Science and Engineering Ethics, 12, 111–122.
Krug, E. G., Dahlberg, L. L., Mercy, J. A., Zwi, A. B., & Lozano, R. (Eds.). (2002). World report on violence and health. Geneva: World Health Organization.
Kurosu, M., Mukai, T., & Ohno, Y. (2003). Regulations and guidelines on handling human materials obtained from medico-legal autopsy for use in research. Legal Medicine, 5, S76–S78.
Liebenberg, J., du Toit-Prinsloo, L., Steenkamp, V., & Saayman, G. (2016). Fatalities involving illicit drug use in Pretoria, South Africa, for the period 2003–2012. South African Medical Journal, 106(10), 1051–1055.
Meurs, J. (2016). The experimental design of postmortem studies: The effect size and statistical power. Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology, 12, 343–349.
Mohr, B. (2013). The current status of laboratory animal ethics in South Africa. ATLA, 41, 48–51.
Mohr, B. J., Fakoya, F. A., Hau, J., Souilem, O., & Anestidou, L. (2016). The governance of animal care and use for scientific purposes in Africa and the Middle East. ILAR Journal, 57(3), 333–346.
Rice, M. J. (2011). The institutional review board is an impediment to human research: The result is more animal-based research. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, 6, 12.
Rollin, B. E. (2006). The regulation of animal research and the emergence of animal ethics: A conceptual history. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 27, 285–304.
Rougé-Maillart, C., Dupont, V., & Jousset, N. (2016). The problem with medical research on tissue and organ samples taken in connection with forensic autopsies in France. Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine, 38, 6–10.
Russell, W. M. S., & Burch, R. L. (1959). The principles of humane experimental technique. London: Metheun.
Seedat, M., Van Niekerk, A., Jewkes, R., Suffla, S., & Ratele, K. (2009). Violence and injuries in South Africa: Prioritising an agenda for prevention. Lancet, 374, 1011–1022.
Sommer, J., Hinsberger, M., Elbert, T., Holtzhausen, L., Kaminer, D., Seedat, S., et al. (2017). The interplay between trauma, substance abuse and appetitive aggression and its relation to criminal activity among high-risk males in South Africa. Addictive Behaviors, 64, 29–34.
Timoshanko, A. C., Marston, H., & Lidbury, B. A. (2016). Australian regulation of animal use in science and education: A critical appraisal. ILAR Journal, 57(3), 324–332.
Tumer, A. R., Karacaoglu, E., Namli, A., Keten, A., Farasat, S., Akcan, R., et al. (2013). Effects of different types of soil on decomposition: An experimental study. Legal Medicine, 15, 149–156.
Turner, P. V., Smiler, K. L., Hargaden, M., & Koch, M. A. (2003). Refinements in the care and use of animals in toxicology studies: Regulation, validation, and progress. Contemporary Topics in Laboratory Animal Science, 42(6), 8–15.
Waterhouse, K. (2013a). The effect of weather conditions on burnt bone fragmentation. Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine, 20, 489–495.
Waterhouse, K. (2013b). The effect of victim age on burnt bone fragmentation: Implications for remains recovery. Forensic Science International, 231, 409.e1–409.e7.
Zangarini, S., Trombino, L., & Cattaneo, C. (2016). Micromorphological and ultramicroscopic aspects of buried remains: Time-dependent markers of decomposition and permanence in soil in experimental burial. Forensic Science International, 263, 74–82.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mole, C.G., Heyns, M. Animal Models in Forensic Science Research: Justified Use or Ethical Exploitation?. Sci Eng Ethics 25, 1095–1110 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-018-0053-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-018-0053-1