Nov 15
2010
|
No. 31: Our Off-Site Housing Facility Lost Its Accreditation – Should Mice Be Moved?Posted by: admin in Tagged in: Untagged
|
|
Sign Up to receive free weekly articles like these
COMPLIANCE
Our Off-Site Housing Facility Lost Its Accreditation – Should Mice Be Moved?
Reader Question: We've just learned that our off-site animal housing facility lost its AAALAC accreditation (Association for Assessment and Accreditation for Laboratory Animal Care, International). We use that facility because of its close proximity to the lab and because the cost is affordable. Should the mice remain at that location, without accreditation, or should I relocate them to an institution housing facility and risk non-compliance because of possible overcrowding?
Expert Comments: My first reaction is that AAALAC accreditation is a voluntary process. Many institutions seek accreditation, and it's what all should be striving toward. But many smaller institutions have excellent animal facilities that are not AAALAC-accredited.
So I do not think accreditation per se is essential for the pursuit of good science. Assuming that the loss of accreditation is likely an expiration issue and not related to animal-welfare concerns, I would propose that you complete your current research study in the facility but initiate no new studies there unless the accreditation is restored.
That is especially true if you are doing a long-term study — such as one involving transgenic animals; they should not be moved for the sake of the study.
But if you are doing more short-term studies (such as drug efficacy in orthotopic models of disease), you might be able to use the available cage quota at your own institution by performing the experiments in smaller groups. For example, rather than using 5,000 animals in a single year, perhaps you can re-design the project using 2,500 animals per year over a two-year span. That shouldn't reduce the statistical power of your experiment.
Under this latter suggestion, you might need to extend your grant by one year. That approach might be preferable because it does not put excessive pressure on the animal-husbandry personnel, which could compromise animal welfare due to what effectively could become a staff shortage.
Expert comments by Martin Tenniswood, PhD, Empire Innovations professor, Department of Biomedical Sciences, and director of the Cancer Research Center, University at Albany, Rensselaer, N.Y. He is a past chair of the university's IACUC and remains a member.
Like this article? Get more in your FREE issue of Laboratory Animal Welfare Compliance.
written by JRT , November 18, 2010
written by NFL jerseys on sale, March 20, 2011
written by Air Max 24-7, April 12, 2011
Monster Energy Hats