Once you have submitted your comments to IACUC
TALK, they will be reviewed and posted in a timely fashion. In order
to see comments that have already been posted, scroll down this page.
Name:
Email:
Institution:
Date: 06 Jun 2008
Comments:
I am responsible for creating an IACUC for a small start-up biotech company. Any suggestions on how to get started?
Name: Flávia
Email: flaviong@usp.br
Institution: University of São Paulo from Brasil
Date: 18 Sep 2007
Comments:
Scaw, I would like to know about decapitation of laboratories animals, Can I use this method? Which the best guillotine I should use?
Thank you very much
Responce:
Just to get something started, here is a brief response and a
couple of attachments that may be of assistance to them. Anyone can feel free to edit or chime in.
There are several guidelines available that discuss acceptable euthanasia procedures. Three peer reviewed documents from the United States, Canada, and the European Union
are attached to assist you in your decision process. The publication from Canada is still in draft form, but has some information that may be useful as well. Decapitation
is discussed in all three documents as being an acceptable form of euthanasia under certain circumstances for rodents and small rabbits. These publications do not
recommend specific equipment, but do state that the equipment should be designed specifically for this purpose and should be kept sharp, clean, and in good working order.
Decapitation devices (guillotines) can be purchased from most research supply companies and in my experience all the brands that I have used have been equal in quality.
Recommended Guidelines
AVMA Guidelines on Euthanasia
CCAC Guidelines
on: laboratory animal procedures-adopted guidelines on euthanasia
Recommendations for euthanasia of
experimental animals: part 1
Name: Lilly-Marlene Russow
Email: lmrussow@hotmail.com
Institution: Purdue University
Date: 26 Mar 2007
Comments:
I recently moved to Elkhorn WI, and am interested in volunteering to serve as a community member on an IACUC in the Milwaukee-Madison area. I have a Ph.D. in philosophy,
and was one of the first people in the country to teach courses in ethics and animals; I was also a frequent invited guest lecturer in both the Department of Animal
Sciences and the School of Veterinary Medicine, as well as at philosohical and scientific conferences and workshops across the country. I am currently semi-retired, but
wish to remain active in the field.
Very briefly, my general position on research on animals is this: it is absolutely necessary, and should be
continued, but education, advances in relevant fields, and active IACUC's all can and should act together to make sure that such research be conducted in line with the
"Three R's" , and as humanely as possible.
I served for many years on the Purdue University IACUC as a 'non-scientist' member. I have been active in SCAW
(served on the Board of Directors for three years), and have published articles on animals in research in the ILAR Journal, SCAW newsletter, and many other places. If you
are interested in contacting me for more information, I can be reached at: lmrussow@hotmail.com. or at (765) 490-4740.
Name: bruce scharf
Email:
bscharf@downstate.edu
Institution: downstate medical school
Date: 05 Jan 2006
Comments:
If the community member of an IACUC committee dies one week before a
regularly scheduled IACUC meeting can that particular IACUC have an
official meeting on that regularly scheduled date having failed to
replace the deceased community member with a new community member in
time for the meeting?
Responce:
Subject:
Maintenance of Properly Constituted IACUCs
Dear Colleague:
This letter provides guidance to Institutional
Officials and Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees (IACUCs)
on the
Public Health Service Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory
Animals (PHS Policy) regarding IACUC membership and functions.
The
PHS Policy specifies that an IACUC shall consist of not less
than five members, and shall include at least: one Doctor of
Veterinary Medicine, with training or experience in laboratory
animal science and medicine, who has direct or delegated program
responsibility for activities involving animals at the institution;
one practicing scientist experienced in research involving animals;
one member whose primary concerns are in a nonscientific area; and
one individual who is not affiliated with the institution in any way
other than as a member of the IACUC, and is not a member of the
immediate family of a person who is affiliated with the institution
(PHS
Policy IV.A.3.b.). In addition, institutions are reminded that
in order to be consistent with the provisions of the 1996
Guide for the
Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, nonaffiliated members should
not be laboratory animal users.
For a variety of reasons, IACUCs may find their
membership lacking one or more of the requisite members specified by
the
PHS Policy. Although there is no requirement that all members be
present at all IACUC meetings, the requirement that the IACUC be
properly constituted in order to conduct official business is
explicit in not only the
PHS Policy and
USDA
Animal Welfare Regulations, but also in the corresponding
authorizing statutes. Accordingly, the
validity of IACUC actions is always predicated on the existence of a
properly constituted IACUC.
When it becomes apparent that an improperly
constituted IACUC has approved a research proposal or taken other
official action, that action is, by definition, invalid. It follows
that animal-related activities without valid approval must be
suspended until appropriate review and approval have occurred. In
addition, prompt reporting of such findings and corrective actions
to OPRR, in accordance with the
PHS Policy (IV.F.3.), is expected.
Careful attention to
PHS Policy language regarding IACUC membership, quorum, and
procedures should prevent this problem from arising. Many
institutions have found that appointing more than the minimum number
of members who meet the respective PHS Policy criteria (paragraph
IV.A.3.b.) obviates problems when an unexpected vacancy occurs.
Name:
Email:
Institution:
Date: 28 Oct 2005
Comments:
Did OLAW comply with NEPA when it was set up? Does it go through the NEPA
process with each assurance? If not why does it feel it is exempt? While lab
studies might qualify, field and endangered species studies do not and OLAW
is approving assurances involving them.
Further does OLAW undertake Section 7 consultations under the Endangered
Species Act with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service concerning assurances
when they may involve endangered animals?
Nonhuman Primate Enrichment:
By amendments to the Animal Welfare
Act, institutions are required to provide nonhuman primate (nhp)
enrichment and to have plans available that detail this
enrichment. Aside from the debate as to whether manipulanda
(toys, forage boards, etc) have any lasting value in improving
the primate's enviornment, there are other questions which
IACUCs should address. Dr. Jim Raber in his article in a recent
ILAR Journal Vol 46(2) reminds us that good intentions of animal
care technicians giving treats, manipulanda or other enrichment
to nhps may in fact impact as a variable on the scientific
study. If the variable is serious enough, then the study may
need to be terminated and, therefore, any previous procedures on
the animals are of no value.
I would like to pose a specific
question regarding nhps which are newly brought into a facility
and are "on hold". That is, nhps come into a holding facility
at an institution. When the IACUC evaluates this "holding"
protocol/proposal, what should they do about enrichment.
Sometimes these animals wait to enter a study for a week, a
month, or many months. If attempts are made to pair house or
to provide any enrichment, aside from the daily humane care and
treatment, this may interfere with that study that they will be
part of at a future date. If they do not become part of the
study for many months, then the institute may be in
noncompliance with the law which requires enrichment unless
withholding enrichment can be justified. So, who decides on
whether any enrichment or the degree? Should the potential
Principal Investigator be asked to coordinate or decide this,
since he/she is the one who should understand the possible study
disruption if enrichment is or is not provided. Should it be
the facility? The IACUC? What wording in the protocol will the
IACUC approve?
Another aspect: If the new arrivals
are housed with nhps already on study, will enrichment given to
them, like a forage board, interfere with the nhps next door who
are already on study and who cannot receive any enrichment
because it will interfere with that study?
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 8:09 AM
Subject: European & Asian Languages medical,
pharmaceutical & veterinary translation
VetMedTranslation
Contact:
Dr. Mohammed Al-Obaidi, B.V.M.S.,
MSc.,PhD, MITI, MIL, MISTC
35 Leicester Way,
Eaglescliffe, Stockton-on-Tees TS16 0LP, U.K.
+44 (0) 1642-645892
vetmed.translation@ntlworld.com
Medical
Translation Pharmaceutical
Translation Veterinary Translation
VetMedTranslation
is the first and only medical, pharmaceutical and veterinary
translation company in the U.K. founded and managed by
academics, medical doctors, pharmacists, veterinarians and other
health professionals with linguistic backgrounds.
VetMedTranslation has developed expertise in
most of the European and Asian languages, including several
which are rarely offered.
Over 10 years,
VetMedTranslation
has been specialising in all medical, pharmaceutical and
veterinary subjects, with experience of translation between
European languages, and from English into Asian languages.
Name:
Jenny Whitlock
Email:
jwhitloc@mail.mcg.edu
Institution: Medical College of Georgia
Date: 01 Jun 2005
Comments:
Are many IACUC's offering their members any type of salary and/or
money allotted for IACUC training i.e. seminars (registration, airfare,
meals)?
Name:
Scott Gardner
Email:
sgardner@lab4less.com
Institution: Lab4less
Date: 07 Mar 2005
Comments:
We are a company in San Diego that buys and sells quality pre-owned vivarium
equipment. We help you stretch your budget by providing quality equipment
for a fraction of the cost, and by helping liquidate your surplus gear.
Please send an email or check us out on the web at www.lab4less.com if
you're interested.
Name:
Ruth Medina
Email:
ruth.medina@umassmed.edu
Institution:
Date: 11 Feb 2005
Comments:
I am looking for a service/software/templates that can help to create the
Policies and Standard Operation Procedures for the IACUC. I am aware
that for the Istitutional Review Bord (for human subjects)there are software
created specifically for this purpose.
Thanks for any help
Name:
Email:
Institution:
Date: 2 Dec 2004
Comments:
If research monkeys are imported and arrive
at JFK airport in New York, where must they be quarantined and for how
long? Are there special regulations about this?
Name:
Chrystal Redding
Email:
Chrystal.redding@nau.edu
Institution: Northern
Arizona University
Date:
29 Nov 2004
Comments:
Our IACUC wants to make
sure that all animal tissue coming to the University is legally obtained in
accordance with all laws and regulations (State and Federal).
Would anyone be willing
to share what their institutions regulatory requirements are for bringing
tissue into the institution?
Name:
Jeffrey Smiley
Email:
jsmil2@uky.edu
Institution: University of Kentucky-Lexington
Date:
25 Nov 2004
Comments:
What
guidelines do you follow for maximum subcutaneous tumor burdens (volume) in
adult mice?
Name:
Jaya
Email:
jayar@keyusa.com
Institution: Key
Solutions Inc
Date:
18 Nov 2004
Comments:
We are a software
development company and have developed a web-based solution that automates
the IACUC processes. This system is used for electronic protocol submission,
protocol routing/reviewing/tracking and management that enables the
investigators, IACUC staff/members and research administrators to process
protocol applications online. It is designed based on the flexible workflow
processes that are adaptable to each and every organization.
If anyone is interested
in a system like this for their organization, please contact us at
408-878-6336 or email us at
jayar@keyusa.com
Name:
David M Mosser
Email:
dmmosser@hotmail.com
Institution: University
of Maryland
Date:
07 Nov 2004
Comments:
I am trying
to get a feel for how much per diem charges other investigators are paying
for mouse housing. If anyone has any information about
their own institution that they are willing to share, or a listing of other
institutions, that would be most appreciated. I am interested in
finding per diem costs for mice in both conventional and barrier facilities.
Thank you
Response:
It seems that the NCRR Publications on
calculating per diem/rate schedules would be of help
Response:
Many attending veterinarians maintain a file
with this info because they compare with each other on a regular basis.
It is all over the map - there is no clear cut answer w/o knowing whether
you're comparing apples and oranges.
Response:
This is a tricky question. Per diem rates are
based upon how much it actually costs to care for a mouse at a specific
facility. It is very difficult to compare these rates between institutions
because of the number of variables involved. For example:
1) Is the faciliities operation subsidized by the Institution (i.e.,
veterinarians salaries, utility costs, waste disposal costs, health care
costs, maintenance, etc.)
2) Is the facility centralized? The proximity of animal rooms to central
supply and support areas affects costs.
3) What type of caging system is used? Conventional caging requires more
cage changing activities than ventilated caging systems?
4) What type of watering systems are used? Bottle watering is more labor
intensive than automatic watering.
5) Geographical location of the facility. Labor rates vary significantly
across the country.
6) Numbers of mice housed per cage.
7) Types of protective clothing required for animal care and research
personnel.
8) Cost of fringe benefits.
9) Many more variables could be added to this list.
I know that Vanderbilt University and Yale have both kept comparisons of
animal facilty per diem rates. You may want to have the person contact
these two facilities for more info.
Name:
Faye Zeiner
Email:
faye.zeiner.b@bayer.com
Institution: Bayer
Healthcare
Date:
24 Oct 2004
Comments:
Researching for
questions/comments/statements for our annual in house IACUC training class.
Name:
Ann Stock
Email: stocka@suffolk.lib.ny.us
Date:
22 Oct 2004
Comments:
Is there a central data
base so that researchers can plug in to find our what projects are being
conducted so that similar research is not duplicated and more animals
being used than necessary?
Name:
Lori R. Hill
Email:
lorih@bcm.tmc.edu
Institution: Baylor
College of Medicine
Date:
22 Oct 2004
Comments:
What is your opinion on
how to categorize the Morris Water Maze? We use the USDA system, even
for rodents. This protocol involves mice.
Name:
Virginia Cantu
Email:
vcantu@olemiss.edu
Institution: University
of Mississippi
Date:
02 Oct 2004
Comments:
I would like any
information concerning procedures other universities have implemented
regarding basic equipment purchase limitations. Within our university, we
have the Office of Research Integrity and Compliance who provides for the
upkeep and maintenance of the facility (physical plant or space), cage
washers, etc. We do not, however, have a policy for the purchase of items,
such as cages, that are specific to the research being conducted. Any
information would be helpful.
Name:
peter nara
Email:
nara@bmi-md.com
Institution: BMI
Date:
29 Sept 2004
Comments:
I was interested in
having information to defend a protocol regarding a safety/toxicity study
employing a 28 day 3x per day oral gavage study in rats. The material is
dosed in humans this way in pill form to derive the therapeautic effect and
based on pre-IND criteria are encouraged to
test in two species (one
being a non-rodent) for safety.
Name:
Alison D. Pohl
Email:
pohl@uchc.edu
Institution: University
of Connecticut HealthCenter
Date:
19 Sept 2004
Comments:
I'd like to know if it
is standard to use the FDA pain classification scale on animal protocols
regardless of species (e.g., fill it out on mice and rats in addition to
USDA-regulated species).
Name:
Susan Watterson
Email:
swatterson@mco.edu
Institution: MCO
Date:
September 15, 2004
Comments:
If an
animal, opossum, is not available commercially, but typically humanely
destroyed by Local Animal Control Authorities; Can an investigator obtain
the dead animal and harvest tissue from it? Since the animal is not being
killed for the purpose of the research is IACUC review and approval
necessary? In what capacity? Would it be only a Health and Safety Concern at
the point of introducing the carcass into the laboratory?
refer them to IACUC 101,
IACUC Advanced, the December SCAW meeting,
www.IACUC.org, and the ARENA/OLAW Institutional Animal Care and Use
Committee Guidebook, 2nd Edition, available at
http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/olaw/olaw.htm
Name:
Margaret Lawrence
Email:
mlawrence@sbi.criver.com
Institution: Sierra Biomedical
Date: 10 Jul 2003
Comments:
I 'm looking for any information that will enable me to obtain knowledge and
learn new skills regarding IACUC policies, procedures, record keeping,
coordinating reports to various agencies.
Can you help?
Name: Julie Morrow
Email:
julie.morrow@ttu.edu
Institution: USSDA-ARS and Texas Tech University
Date:
Comments:
I have reviewed an ACUC protocol for establishment of a rodent breeding
colony. I was very uncomfortable with the maximum number of animals the
colony could produce (240 pups every 21 days). I wanted some assurance in
the protocol that the number of excess animals that needed to be euthanized
because they were not needed for research could be as low as possible. The
attending vet argued that commercial breeders commonly euthanize surplus
animals and don't require any verification of how many animals they need to
produce. How do other committees view breeding colonies and the
justification for number of breeding pairs allowed???
I do know that many
places do pay an honorarium to IACUC members. It is entirely appropriate as
long as the amount is in line with what they give others and is not
excessive.
Name:
Jim Gnadt
Email:
jgnadt@sunysb.edu
Institution: SUNY at Stony Brook
Date:
Comments:
The IACUC at SUNYSB is considering the issue of some nominal compensation
for our public members, since there is no "institutional service" credit
like the university memebers enjoy. Is there any compiled data on how
common and how much this might be among the major research universities
where the work load can be substantial? Is the equivalent of an
acedemic
honorarium appropriate?
Name:
Wendy Burns
Email:
wburns@nhgri.nih.gov
Institution:NIH/NHGRI
Date: 22 May 2003
Comments:
Our ACUC was wondering what USDA pain category was designated by other
institutions for mice/zebrafish involved in ENU mutagenesis research?
Name:
Lee Krulisch, Executive
Director, SCAW
Email:
Institution:
Date: 21 May 2003
Comments
From previous discussions I thought that PHS Policy required
the responsibility to follow the dollars, i.e., who "owns" the animal at the
time, and that USDA policy required responsibility to follow the animal,
i.e. location of animal. After asking for clarification, it is more involved
than I thought for the case you describe. USDA essentially follows
ownership; the owner of the animal is responsible for ensuring compliance
with AWA for that animal. USDA (according to Dr. >DeHaven/Animal Care/USDA)
will recognize prior contractual arrangements made between two parties
(e.g., an institution using a contractor), but there needs to be a clear
shifting of responsibility; otherwise, USDA may hold both parties liable
for AWA compliance. Often there are two IACUCs >involved, and it is crucial
that they communicate and share information. It is true that PHS policy
generally requires that responsibility follow the dollar/"ownership" of the
animal; OPRR's authority is based on the source of support. However, PHS
policy may not be applicable in this case. Dr. >Garnett (OPRR/NIH) has
commented that "For our purposes, the technical issue >of ownership is not
particularly relevant to assignment of responsibility." First, the awardee
institution is responsible for ensuring that all animal work and
performance sites (including subgrantned of subcontracted work) are
specified in the grant application and done at an Assured institution in accordance with PHS Policy. That automatically places collaborating
>institutions on somewhat equal footing and allows certain assumptions to be
>made about the program, IACUC review, etc. Some latitude is allowed for two
>Assured institutions to determine who is responsible for what, but that
should be made clear in advance. The performance site is the best position
to exercise appropriate control and oversight.
Note: Another question regarding "responsibility" for animals
is what does >the IACUC do when field research is conducted in a different
state or >different country? What do IACUCs do? To clarify the situation
further, an >example would be a professor doing behavior research on
nonhuman primates in Africa during the summer break, or, more invasive, a
professor capturing butterflies in Guatemala to take certain physiological
measurements.
Name:
Richard W. Diters
Email: rick.diters@Primedica.com
Institution: Primedica Corporation
Date: 20 May 2003
Comments
I would be very interested in comments from other IACUC
members regarding how your IACUC/Facility handles studies that originate in
your facility but animals later transfer to another location for holding
and/or monitoring. We have encountered this situation a few times especially
for medical device work where the intitial device implantation and
postoperative care is done at one location. Subsequently, the animals are
moved to another location for longterm holding. The study director remained
the same and was located at the facility where the surgery was performed. My
impression is that the IACUC of the latter facility should assume oversight
since the IACUC and IO of the former facility have no authority to assure
compliance with the AWA at the second facility. Further it would seem
prudent that the 2 IACUCs share information to facilitate the process.
Name:
kurt samson
Email: kjsamson@aol.com
Institution: AAMI
Date: 04 May 2003
Comments
I am looking for any recent figures (1995 - ) on use of the
Draize test in industry. The latest I have are from 1991.
Name:
Lee Krulisch
Email: info@scaw.com
Institution: SCAW
Date: 11 May 2003
Comments
There are several books and articles out on nonhuman primate
enrichment. Your first source probably should the ILAR GUIDE (if you need a
copy, ask SCAW). Kathryn Bayne, Sandy Dexter, Melinda Novak, Victor
Reinhardt and others have written articles for LAB ANIMAL (Nature
Publishing, 345 Park Avenue South, NY, NY 10010-1707) and LABORATORY PRIMATE
NEWSLETTER (e-mail: primate@brownvm.brown.edu) For instance, in the October
1998 issue of Laboratory Primate Newsletter are articles about pair housing
of adult macaques. The Primate Information Center also published CURRENT
PRIMATE REFERENCES, address: Primate Info. Center, University of Washington,
1101 Westlake Ave. North, Seattle, WA 98109-3527. The ANIMAL WELFARE
INSTITUTE also published "Environmental Enhancement for Caged Rhesus
Macaques," address: AWI, PO Box 3650, Washington, DC 20007. I know that NIH
is interested in promoting appropriate pair housing. One thought that has
been presented to them is that if investigators have concerns that pair or
group housing might interfere with the science, that we need to remember
that animals do not have to be housed together ALL THE TIME -- they can be
separated when necessary to do the protocols. These are just a few
suggestions.
Name:
Stacy N. Barnes
Email: sbarnes@biosupport.com
Institution: SNBL USA Ltd.
Date: 11 May 2003
Comments
I am interested in finding information on Primate enrichment
requirements. Also, I would like to get ideas on others enrichment programs
which are both cost effective, and productive. I would like to see our
primates(rhesus macaque's) in a pair housing environment, but their are
questions, concerns; about the safety of the animals. In my experience, the
animals have profited from social contact, but some of my colleques feel
this will cause more harm than good...
Name:
Loretta Polite
Email: lcp1@mhg.edu
Institution: Medlantic Research Institute
Date:
Comments
We are a small research institute in Washington DC, with a
small animal facility that handles dogs, rats, mice and pigs. We are
currently seeking to hire a contract vetinarian and need some information
about the average salary range for this type of position.
Any help/suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
Name:
Steven Nitka
Email: snitka@cptclabs.com
Institution: Consumer Product Testing
Date:
Comments
I am interesting in obtaining protocols useful in determing
the efficacy of an orally ingested analgesic. Are there alternatives or
refinements to the Mouse Hot Plate assay and others of that type? Please
advise.
Name:
Jacqueline Poore
Email: jpoore@lifespan.org
Institution: Rhode Island Hospital
Date:
Comments
RE: Inspections We also use the OPRR sample inspection form
for our semi-annual tour and program evaluation. It is clear, concise and
easy to use.
RE: Community Represenattives: We have 3 members who are
non-affiliated, non-scientists serving on our 15 member panel. Their input
is invaluable, especially in removing the 'science blinders' from our eyes.
Try recruiting from area universities and high school teachers.
RE: Animal tissue At our institution, the investigator
donating the unused tissue, post mortem, would be required to obtain IACUC
permission in the form of a 'change to protocol request' We have reviewed
several requests for post-mortem use of limbs for orthopaedic studies after
the completion of an unrelated experiment. The number of animals used is
reduced, and there is no increase in pain/distress.
Name:
Mary Lou James
Email: mljames@mo.net
Institution: Consultant Regultaory Compliance, Research Animal
Welfare
Date:
Comments
In response to Barbara Smith's March 16, 1999 question re:
scientific merit review ("Where can I find written recommendations for
peer-reviewing protocols (for scientific merit) that are not funded by
outside agencies."), I suggest that the following publication may be
helpful: Scientific Merit Review: The Role of the IACUC. Prentice, ED et al,
ILAR News, 34, 1992 (1-2): 15-19.
Name:
Email:
Institution:
Date:
Comments
SCAW does offer the service of making comments, questions on
IACUC TALK anonymous. Since IACUC TALK is open to everyone, and not a
listserve, we felt this was an important option.
Name:
Lynn Willis
Email: willisl@iupui.edu
Institution: Indiana University School of Medicine
Date:
Comments
I am curious what policies other IACU Committees have in
regards to use of animal tissues once an animal has been euthanized under an
>IACUC-approved protocol.
For us, this depends on whether the investigator will take
only tissues or the whole animal (dead or alive). If only tissue, (and the
approved donor performs the euthanasia), we ask the investigator who will
receive the tissues to write a letter to the IACUC describing what he/she
plans to do with the tissue. The IACUC reviews and votes on that request.
This is to head off any question about IACUC approval if the results of that
study eventually get published. If the investigator wants to take the entire
animal, even though it will be dead, we require a full animal-use
application. We do this because the Animal Welfare Act defines an animal as
either alive or dead.
In the case of the tissue-only investigators, we encourage
them to submit a new protocol in any case. We ask them what they will do if
their supply of donated tissue dries up. If they will go no further with the
research unless they can get the tissues from other investigators, no
problem and the letter to the IACUC will suffice; however, if in a shortage
of donors they will want to acquire the tissues from their own animals, we
remind them that they will need an approved protocol to order such animals.
It is therefore expedient for them to have an approved protocol in the file
even if they never use it (under those circumstances, they need fill out
only a small relevant portion of the apllication form).
Name:
Lynn Willis
Email: willis@iupui.edu
Institution: Indiana University School of Medicine
Date:
Comments
On the subject of having 1 or 2 non-affiliated members on the
IACUC, I'd say it's up to the local IACUC to decide. Moreover, I take
serious issue with the notion that "protocol review meetings were not
satisfactory if the nonaffiliated member did not attend because then the
community point of view would not be heard." The "community point of view"
on animal research, seems pretty clear to me: "Conduct animal research but
do it responsibly." It would be a pretty sad situation if the presence of
the NA member was the only guarantee of a "satisfactory" review of
protocols. The IACUC members should be able to understand the ethics of
animal research, the requirements of the Animal Welfare Act, and the
elements of responsible animal husbandry, and act accordingly whether
there's an NA there or not.
As it happens, we have two NA members on our IACUC, but not
for any special reason other than the past chairman thought they'd be
valuable members of the committee (he was correct). Often, only one is able
to attend our meetings. Sometimes neither one can make it. Both of these
folks are vocal and assertive, and I'd expect them to tell me (I'm the
current chairman) if they thought the quality of the reviews suffered when
they weren't there.
Name:
Stuart Johnson
Email: stu-johnson@nwu.edu
Institution: VA Chicago Health Care System- Lakeside
Date:
Comments
I am curious what policies other IACUCommittees have in
regards to use of animal tissues once an animal has been euthanized under an
IACUC-approved protocol. For instance, If an investigator wants to test a
new assay or perform a preliminary experiment using, say a mouse liver, and
a colleague has euthanized a mouse under his/her protocol and is willing to
donate the liver, what type of oversight is felt necessary by the IACUC? The
benefit might be to spare additional animals purchased and sacrificed for
this purpose. I would appreciate any comments.
Name:
Mary Ann Jurgus
Email: mjurgus@wpo.it.luc.edu
Institution: Loyola University @ Medical Center
Comments
I've noticed a few comments from non-disclosed names,
institutions, etc. It would be great if people remembered to include this
information. It's always nice to know to whom you are talking.
To the individual who discussed "inspections" -- does the
institution you are referring to use inspection sheets?
Name:
Lee Krulisch
Email:
Institution: SCAW
Comments
Question: There has been talk about recommending that two
nonaffiliated/community members serve on IACUCs. What do you think? Are
there ethical reasons to do this? Practical reasons? What are the problems
with this?
Now, I can reply! The premise heard at the SCAW workshops for
nonaffiliated and nonscientists members was that IACUC protocol review
meetings were not satisfactory if the nonaffiliated member did not attend
because then the community point of view would not be heard. This puts a lot
of pressure on the NA member to attend every protocol review. However, it is
often difficult to find one NA member; two might be much more difficult. So,
what else?
Name:
Email:
Institution:
Date: 28 Apr 1999
Comments
GUIDELINES FOR INSPECTION. The OPRR has an excellent sample
document on the website. It is rather lengthy because it covers all types of
facilities. This form was used for the first time during our last
inspection. Each member was given a copy to check off approval or make
comments on. The Chairman and Attending Veterinarian explained and looked
for issues on the list from one room to the next. Questions were asked by
members throughout the inspection that especially was helpful to new
members. The list were collected at the end of the inspection and a report
was submitted at the next meeting. You can customize the OPRR suggested list
for your facility. Our committee was pleased with the results and it was an
inspection that was more detailed than usual and pointed out issues not
thought about before.
Name:
Ralph B. Dell
Email: rdell@nas.edu
Institution: Institute for Laboratory Animal Research
Date: 15 Apr 1999
Comments
Timing of elective surgery is an issue in which the IACUC
should be involved. The committee can work with the investigator, reason,
explain why it is good for his/her animals and her/his research. If this
doesn't work then charge the investigator extra money for people to work
overtime.
Name:
Email:
Institution:
Date: 15 Apr 1999
Comments
Most IACUCs do not include training for inspections, if they
have training programs for IACUC members. My experience as a new
nonaffiliated member of an IACUC has been: Somewhat familiar with the
"Guide" and institutional policies, on the first inspection, you listen and
find out what others on the inspection are looking at and commenting about.
And of course, you look at the animals and learn what species are used in
that institution, and also historically what the problems have been. On the
next inspection, maybe you are the first one to spot an uncovered food
storage container or lack of an animal record card on a cage or an animal
that doesn't look right. And so it goes; it seems that experience is the
basis for information about facility inspections.
Name:
William L. Wade, LVT, LATG
Email: w-wade@nwu.edu
Institution: Northwestern University
Date: 15 Apr 1999
Comments
What are your guidelines for inspection of laboratory areas?
Use of checklists, references, the Guide, etc. What types of training do
your IACUC members receive in this area? Comments and insight greatly
appreciated.
Name:
Lisa Alper
Email: alperl@pamf.org
Institution: Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Research Institute
Date: 13 Apr 1999
Comments
We are currently having an issue regarding the time that
elective surgery is being performed on animals. The investigator refuses to
do this elective surgery early in the morning so as to monitor the animal's
recovery during the remainder of the day. Instead, the investigator believes
he should be able to perform surgery at his choice of time. If surgery is
performed later in the day, this would mean that he or his technican must
return to the building at some point during the night to check the animal.
This is a difficult thing to monitor, since office hours are only until 5:30
PM.
Any suggestions on how to handle this?
Name:
theron s. rumsey
Email: trumsey@lpsi.barc.usda.gov
Institution: BARC - Livestock and Poultry Sciences Institute
Date: 05 Apr 1999
Comments
A current issue for us has been the use of electrostatic air
filters in laboratory animal rooms, particulary the use of portable units in
dog and cat rooms. What is the efficiency of these units for reducing
allergens/aerosolized allergens. Our understanding is the reduction can be
significant but have found no literature to this point that directly
addresses the issue.
Name:
Calixta Diez
Email: calixta_d@hotmail.com
Institution: Kildare College
Date: 05 Apr 1999
Comments
Is there anywhere i can get a listing of the companies that
test on animals???
Name:
Lee Krulisch
Email: info@scaw.com
Institution: SCAW
Date: 25 Mar 1999
Comments
At the April 1999 meeting sponsored by NCAB/AALAS and SCAW,
one session will be on the relationship between IACUC and principal
investigators. I am looking for scenarios, anonymous case studies that
highlight this relationship. Also, are there any questions you might want to
be addressed? For example, (1) how often do IACUC members meet PIs,
especially nonaffiliated members? Usually, these meetings take place on
semi-annual inspections or if the PI is asked to appear before the IACUC to
answer questions; (2) how often do PIs try to go "above" the IACUC, say to
the Institutional Official, to override a decision by the IACUC? Debi Faryna
and I want to make this session interesting and stimulate some thought, so
anything you all can contribute will be a great help.
Name:
Ron McLaughlin
Email: mclaughlinR@health.missouri.edu
Institution: University of Missouri
Date: 25 Mar 1999
Comments
RE: Barbara Smith's request for "written recommendations for
peer-reviewing protocols (for >scientific merit). One basis for requiring
merit review is that the PHS Policy and the lab animal >"Guide," and the new
Ag animal "Guide" eitherincorporate or strongly endorse the US U.S.
>Government Principles as fundamental to the humane care and use of animals
in experimentation. >Among these principles is: >II. Procedures involving
animals should be designed and performed with due consideration of their
relevance to human or animal health, the >advancement of knowledge, or the
good of society. > >A more simplistic reason, on the surface, hinges on a
cost benefit relationship between the amount of animal pain and distress and
the probability of >worthwhile scientific results. If the ethical cost in
terms of animal pain and distress is high, then there is a sense that there
should be a >correspondingly high probability of a scientific result of
substantial value. If there is no pain or distress, then concern for
humaneness is not an issue, >and concern for the merit of the science,
vis-a-vis humaneness, is not an issue.