University second in lab violations

The University tied with Yale for the second-worst Research Misconduct Score in the Ivy League in a report released yesterday by the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine.

The report was published based on statistics and conclusions drawn from routine inspections by the United States Department of Agriculture. Report author Dr. John Pippin took into account the results of the USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service as well as severe violations, non-severe violations and institution funding to dedicate a research misconduct score to each school. The University of Pennsylvania was ranked last for animal misconduct with a score of 120, followed by Princeton and Yale with scores of 49 each and Harvard with a score of 48.

According to the report, the University’s infractions include “a pattern of deliberate, excessive water restriction in primates” as well as failure to provide appropriate veterinary care to a pregnant marmoset. Though water deprivation is sometimes used as an experimental procedure in primates, the report deemed the restriction “excessive.”

“The water deprivation was not approved in their protocol, which seems to indicate it was not part of testing,” Pippin said.

This most recent report of animal experimentation violations is only one in a string of animal testing infractions that have spanned the last two years at the University. On June 1, 2011, APHIS sent a formal warning to the University noting that further violations would result in fines of $3,750 each. This warning came after a routine May inspection that found primates being deprived of water for up to 24 hours, failure to document certain procedures, unapproved anesthetics and an isolated incident of a marmoset escaping its cage.

“For the USDA to warn you of fines, it is a sign that you have willfully, on a repetitive basis, violated the Animal Welfare Act,” Pippin said. “As an Ivy League graduate and former animal researcher myself, it is shameful.”

University Spokesperson Martin Mbugua said the University is taking steps to improve research that includes testing on animals. “We are strengthening our oversight of animal research by reviewing the University’s Institutional Animals Care and Use Committee procedures and hiring additional lab safety personnel,” he said in an email, adding that the improvements include increased training for IACUC members and a plan to enhance training for investigators.

PCRM, the organization that backed Pippin’s report, is composed of scientists and doctors who address issues of medical care, nutrition and product testing. The organization significantly opposes laboratory testing on animals.

“Our position is that we have reached a point in our technical expertise where it is not necessary to use and dissect animals to train doctors and students or test drugs, household products and cosmetics,” Pippin said.

But animal testing is an invaluable part of research, Mbugua said, and the University will maintain animal welfare according to approved protocols.

“Animal research at institutions like the University leads to breakthroughs that benefit not only people, but also the environment, and even other animal species,” he said. “For virtually every major biomedical advance of the last century, the advance would have been unattainable without the critical role played by animal research.”