PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 11652253

The three Rs: a restrictive and refutable rigmarole.

H Lansdell
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

In 1959 Russell and Burch proposed "the three Rs" (reduction, refinement, or replacement) as principles for using fewer animals in research, reducing the pain and discomfort of those that are used, and substituting organic material in place of whole animals. Arguments that scientists should support the principles and arguments that they are restrictive and not fully relevant to the scientific enterprise are considered. The conclusion is that biological scientists should eschew their acceptance.

Explore related subjects

Animal ExperimentationAnimal RightsAnimal Testing AlternativesAnimal WelfareAnimalsBiomedical ResearchHumansPainPoliticsResearchResearch DesignResearch PersonnelRiskRisk AssessmentSocial Control, FormalStress, PsychologicalBiomedical and Behavioral ResearchJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

H Lansdell. 1993. The three Rs: a restrictive and refutable rigmarole.. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327019eb0302_3

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

Field studies and the IACUC: protocol review, oversight, and occupational health and safety considerations.

Field studies involving animals, like other institutional research endeavors, are regulated and evaluated by an IACUC to insure that the protocols employed in those studies are consistent with the most humane care and use of animals. Unlike many other on-site research projects, however, field studies present unique logistical and other challenges to IACUC evaluation. The authors explore many of these challenges, including the special protocol considerations and idiosyncratic occupational health and safety concerns characteristic of field-study reviews.

Animal Experimentation↗