Animal Experimentation in Ecuador: When Ethics Precedes the Law. Technical note
Abstract
This contribution addresses the ethical challenges associated with animal experimentation in Ecuador, a country that, while constitutionally recognizing the rights of nature, still lacks explicit and precise regulations governing the use of animals in scientific research and educational activities. Nevertheless, initial steps have been taken through Resolution 0227 (Agrocalidad, 2021), which sets requirements for Ethics Committees and the operation of animal facilities. Based on philosophical principles and international bioethical frameworks, the paper argues for the need for Ecuadorian institutions to move beyond mere formal compliance with regulations, promoting a culture of shared responsibility based on transparency and interspecies respect. Among the recommendations, particular emphasis is placed on the urgency for Ecuador to adopt the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement), as well as their expansion to the 12Rs, as a foundation for a comprehensive ethical approach to the management of animals used in research and teaching.
Downloads
References
Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. Principles of biomedical ethics.8th ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2019.
Resnik DB. What Is Ethics in Research and Why Is It Important? Natl. Inst. Environ. Health Sci. [Internet]. 2020 [Recuperado 28 abril 2025]. Disponible en:https://goo.su/nQqgD
Franco NH, Olsson IAS. Scientists and the 3Rs: attitudes to animal use in biomedical research and the effect of mandatory training in laboratory animal science. Lab. Anim. [Internet]. 2013; 48(1):50–60. doi: https://doi.org/f5k3ks DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0023677213498717
Broom D. Sentience and Animal Welfare. Hulbert S, Killick J, eds. Wallingford, England: CABI Publishing. [Internet]. 2014. 179 p.doi: https://doi.org/pthj
Mellor DJ. Updating animal welfare thinking: Moving beyond the “Five Freedoms” towards “A life worth living.” Animals. [Internet]. 2016; 6(3):21. doi: https://doi.org/ggwjk4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani6030021
Garattini S, Grignaschi G. Animal testing is still the best way to find new treatments for patients. Eur. J. Intern. Med. [Internet]. 2017; 39:32–35. doi: https://doi.org/gbhjv5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejim.2016.11.013
Knight A. The costs and benefits of animal experiments. 1st ed. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan. [Internet]. 2011. 254 p.doi: https://doi.org/c9vf8q
Russell W, Burch RL. Universities Federation for Animal Welfare. The principles of humane experimental technique. Special edition. Potters Bar: Universities Federation for Animal Welfare; 1992. 238 p. Disponible en: https://goo.su/6kJTU5X
Tannenbaum J, Bennett BT. Russell and Burch’s 3Rs then and now: the need for clarity in definition and purpose. J. Am. Assoc. Lab. Anim. Sci. 2015 [citado 12 Enero 2025]; 54(2):120–132. PMID: 25836957. Disponible en: https://goo.su/7UEb5
Balls M. The three Rs and the humanity criterion. In: Russell WMS, Burch RL, editors. An Abridged Version of the Principles of Humane Experimental Technique. Nottingham: Fund for the Replacement of Animals in Medical Experiment (FRAME); 2009. 131 p.
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Test no. 236: Fish embryo acute toxicity (FET) test. [Internet]. Paris: Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 2, OECD Publishing; 2025. Disponible en: https://doi.org/pthk
Leist M, Hasiwa N, Daneshian M, Hartung T. Validation and quality control of replacement alternatives – current status and future challenges. Toxicol. Res. [Internet]. 2012; 1(1):8–22. doi: https://doi.org/pthm DOI: https://doi.org/10.1039/c2tx20011b
Festing MFW, Altman DG. Guidelines for the design and statistical analysis of experiments using laboratoryanimals. ILAR J. [Internet]. 2002; 43(4):244–258. doi: https://doi.org/gf37tk DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ilar.43.4.244
Marín-García PJ, Llobat L. Use of alternative methodologies in veterinary medicine learning and acceptance of students. Educ. Sci. [Internet]. 2022; 12(7):476. doi: https://doi.org/pthn DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12070476
Leary S, Underwood W, Anthony R, Cartner S, Grandin T, Greenacre C, Gwaltney-Brant S, McCrackin MA, Meyer R, Miller D, Shearer J, Turner T, Yanong R. AVMA guidelines for the euthanasia of animals: 2020 edition. Schaumburg, IL: American Veterinary Medical Association. [Internet]. 2020. Disponible en: https://goo.su/0Gbwb
Percie du Sert N, Hurst V, Ahluwalia A, Alam S, Avey MT, Baker M, Browne WJ, Clark A, Cuthill IC, Dirnagl U, Emerson M, Garner P, Holgate ST, Howells DW, Karp NA, Lazic SE, Lidster K, MacCallum CJ, Macleod M, Pearl EJ, Petersen OH, Rawle F, Reynolds P, Rooney K, Sena ES, Silberberg SD, Steckler T, Würbel H. The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: Updated guidelines for reporting animal research. BMC Vet. Res. [Internet]. 2020; 16:242. doi: https://doi.org/gqc8z4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12917-020-02451-y
Olsson IAS, Dahlborn K. Improving housing conditions for laboratory mice: a review of “environmental enrichment.” Lab. Anim. [Internet]. 2002; 36(3):243–270. doi: https://doi.org/b5q54n DOI: https://doi.org/10.1258/002367702320162379
Rowlands DK, Guillén J. The use of performance-based outcomes in achieving better global harmonization in the care and use of animals in research. Lab. Anim. [Internet]. 2025; 59(1):120-127. doi: https://doi.org/pthp DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00236772241309745
Brink CB, Lewis DI. The 12 Rs Framework as a comprehensive, unifying construct for principles guiding animal research ethics. Animals. [Internet]. 2023;13(7):1128. doi: https://doi.org/pthq DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13071128
Barrios E, Espinoza M, Leal U, Ruiz N, Pinto V, Jurado B. Bioética y el empleo de animales de experimentación en investigación. [Internet]. 2011 [citado 03 May 2025]; 15(2):28-34. Disponible en: https://goo.su/BLSiap
Guimarães MV, Freire JE da C, Menezes LMB de. Utilização de animais em pesquisas: breve revisão da legislação no Brasil. Rev. Bioét. [Internet]. 2016; 24(2):217–224. doi: https://doi.org/pthr DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-80422016242121
Martínez CA, de Osorio AM. Ética en investigación con animales: Una actitud responsable y respetuosa del investigador con rigor y calidad científica. Rev. Latinoam. Bioet. [Internet]. 2008[citado 03 May 2025]; 8(2):46–71. Disponible en: https://goo.su/p2gmKb
Martinson BC, Anderson MS, de Vries R. Scientists behaving badly. Nature. [Internet]. 2005; 435:737–738. doi: https://doi.org/bdbqkg DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/435737a
Loannidis JPA. How to make more published research true. PLoS Med. 2014; 11(10):e1001747. doi: https://doi.org/gfc87k DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001747
Jankoski LGQ, Fischer ML. O papel da bioética nas comissões de ética animal. Rev. Bioét. [Internet]. 2019; 27(3):549–565. doi: https://doi.org/pths DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-80422019273340
Asamblea Nacional. Constitución de la República del Ecuador. [Internet]. Quito: Asamblea Nacional; 2021 [Recuperado 19 Apr 2025]. Disponible en: https://goo.su/CJQP1Ns
Agencia de Regulación y Control Fito y Zoosanitario. Resolución 0227. Reglamento para la conformación, aprobación y seguimiento de Comités de Ética para la Investigación con Animales en el Ecuador. [Internet]. Quito: Agencia de Regulación y Control Fito y Zoosanitario; [Internet]. 2021 [Recuperado 20 Apr 2025]. Disponible en: https://goo.su/FBEI
Castro CAC. Bioética y experimentación en animales de vida silvestre: una revisión de la praxis científica en las universidades del Ecuador, 2020. [Tesis de maestría en Internet]. Quito: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador; 2021 [Recuperado 20 Apr 2025]. Disponible en: https://goo.su/OAFM7
