The discussants considered not only the various regulatory systems that govern animal care and use, but also the emergence of private party actions to intervene in the enforcement of regulations and the increasing use of freedom of information approaches, such as federal and state “sunshine” legislation in the United States, to seek information about animal care and use (Institute of Medicine, 2012). While not representing a total consensus of all the workshop’s

participants, some important messages emerged during the presentations and subsequent discussions. Key among these was the need for a strong regulatory and institutional compliance framework to ensure that the use of animals in research is ethically secure and legally sound and to provide confidence in public communication about, and defense of, the research. At the same time, delegates were concerned to Dabrafenib find more avoid placing unnecessary constraints on important neuroscience research. The scientific study of living organisms is critical if we are to understand both life on earth and the diseases and disorders that we cannot yet treat or prevent. Since all living organisms have a common origin and all vertebrates

share a large fraction of their genes and a wide range of cellular mechanisms, we have already learned a great deal about the principles of human biology and behavior from animal models and can hope to learn more. Moreover, advances in veterinary care also depend crucially on understanding gained from the study of animals. A common feature of animal research

legislation around the world is that animals may be used for some experimental procedures that would not be acceptable in humans. These include manipulation of the environment, the genetics, or the PAK6 bodies of the animals. Nevertheless, it must be appreciated that the use of animals in neuroscience research raises particularly sharp ethical issues. The fact that many harrowing disorders of the nervous system, such as dementias, Parkinson’s disease, and motor neuron disorders, are increasing in prevalence and are not adequately treatable heightens the potential benefits of such research. But for the same reasons, neuroscience research often involves the creation of such distressing conditions in animals, or the manipulation of their experience, in ways that highlight the potential ethical costs of animal research. As neuroscience research moves forward, there is likely to be a continuing reliance on animal models. This likelihood must not be concealed in discussions with politicians, the media, the public, or with groups that oppose animal use. But this should not preclude grasping opportunities to implement the 3Rs: indeed any continuing need to use animals simply raises the moral imperative to optimize welfare and to search for every way to reduce suffering.