London

The Research Defence Society (RDS), which represents the interests of British scientists who use animals in their research, used to get a trickle of complaints about delays in granting licences for experiments using animals. Now, it claims, that trickle has become a flood of around 30 complaints a month.

Britain operates arguably the world's toughest regulations governing research on animals. Many scientists support the goal of improving animal welfare. But they claim that the administrative burden of processing licence applications, amendments and renewals has increased beyond the system's capacity to cope.

The situation has worsened since April 1999, when further regulations were introduced and a new layer was added to the process: local ethical review boards. Delays in processing applications in the Home Office — the government department that approves licences for animal research — were already common.

But they seem to be getting worse, and the new hurdles have stretched scientists' patience. “I am on the verge of giving up animal research because of the bureaucratic cost,” says one physiologist.

While feelings are running high, few scientists are prepared to speak out openly. Years of violent protests from extremists at the fringe of the British animal-rights movement have left a climate of fear.

Clive Page, a medical researcher at King's College London, has already fallen victim to intimidation. In 1998, when an animal-rights activist jailed for arson was threatening to starve himself to death, a group called the Animal Rights Militia promised to kill ten named scientists if he died. Page was number two on the list.

On alert: the rising popularity of transgenic mice is leading to an increase in animal experiments. Credit: TEK IMAGE/SCIENCE PHOTO LIBRARY

Page works on lung disease, and is trying to find out how white blood cells get into lung tissue. One approach is to use genetic ‘knockout’ mice that lack the proteins involved, but the time taken to gain a licence to do the work in Britain means Page cannot compete with researchers elsewhere. “We are talking about sending someone to the United States as a faster way of doing this work,” he says.

Similar complaints are not hard to find. One researcher applying to renew a project licence waited “an astonishing and depressing 15 months”. In another example, a veterinary practitioner who started a PhD at a university in northeast England has not been paid since February because funds from his studentship will not arrive until his licence is approved.

The Home Office is questioning the number of animals he plans to use. “I don't want to see animals wasted,” says the researcher. “But there is no point doing three years' work and finding you haven't enough animals to get statistical significance.”

Les Ward, director of Edinburgh-based Advocates for Animals, which campaigns for the abolition of animal experiments, sees things differently. “Those complaining of bureaucracy need to appreciate that it's for the best reasons: animal welfare, and making sure the best science is used to reassure the public in whose name it is being done.”

Ward, who sits on the Home Office's Animal Procedures Committee, accuses the RDS of “spinning” the issue by encouraging researchers to complain about such administrative delays. “We have some die-hard scientists who resent any change,” he adds. “These people have to accept that their applications will not be rubber-stamped any more.”

Many scientists, however, accept that some proposals will be turned down on ethical grounds. But they want to know quickly, so they can move on to other projects. The main reason for the delays, they argue, is that the number of officials has failed to keep pace with the burgeoning paperwork.

Some universities are hiring staff to cope with the local review. But the Home Office has only 21 inspectors to oversee the entire regulatory system. “You must cater for the changes by increasing the number of inspectors,” says the veterinary researcher.

Some animal-welfare groups agree. The Fund for the Replacement of Animals in Medical Experiments, based in Nottingham, says inspectors turn round applications as quickly as they can — but their workloads are simply too high, and are likely to increase.

Over the past 25 years, the number of experimental procedures involving animals in Britain has decreased steadily. But last year, the total rose by 1 per cent, largely due to a growth in demand for transgenic mice.

As more researchers turn to transgenic mice, this trend is likely to increase. RDS director Mark Matfield predicts that the rising demand for transgenics could push up the total number of animal procedures in Britain by 5 per cent a year. This will be embarrassing for the government, which is committed to reducing the number of animals used for research.

“We are planning to review the ethical review procedure,” says a Home Office spokesman. “We are aware of concerns expressed, but we remain convinced that it has a positive role to play.”