Animal testing exists and is carried out all over the world, Europe being no exception. The UK has higher standards of animal welfare than many European countries, but is now going to examine these standards against an EU Directive on animal research. Some of the new suggested standards are lower than those used currently throughout the UK, e.g. dog pens are currently 4.5 square metres, but EU law will suggest that they need only be 4 square metres. The UK will not have to reduce the current standards to meet EU standards, but there would be nothing to stop them from doing so. Or is there? Exactly how the UK choose to transpose EU directive into UK practice making it UK law remains to be seen and will be decided by the Home Office in the next few months.  

Amid fears that bioscience companies will cherry pick what standards are most profitable and opt for minimum requirements, today representatives from the UK's science community responded to the EU Directive on animal research.

The Head of Research Management and Communications, National Centre for 3Rs was keen to underline that welfare is linked to scientific discovery, in that animals given the best conditions show more natural behavours and are therefore better models in animal research. Better welfare, better results in short. He also stated that the UK is no less competitive for maintaining high standards, even in the absence of scientific evidence that these high standards are necessary, and that the standards that exceed those of the proposed EU directive will be maintained to keep the public's confidence. 

The Chief Executive of The Assoc of Medical Research Charities talked about patient voice and funding of research through charitable donation, claiming that 85% of UK public support animal research for medical purposes provided there is no alternative, there is ethical and peer review and that, notably, stringent UK standards are maintained. 

A Pfizer representative commented that animal research is only a small part of pharmaceutical research and that the UK is a world leader in animal research welfare, and hopes to remain so. 


However - how can the UK withstand the inevitable pressure? If other EU countries are maintianing minimum legal standards for animal welfare, how can the UK possibly claim that it won't relax current UK standards to simply be more profitable? Better conditions must surely cost more? 

How high is a high standard and is it high enough? At what cost do we change our research techniques - animal welfare is surely integral? Are the recent suggestions from the EU Directive merely reform to standardise and open up the biosciences field in the name of discovery and progress, or is it just a way of cutting cost in some areas and disregarding the raw realities of animal research?