动物实验伦理的三个维度：基于生命价值、动物福利和风险防范的阐析

doi:10.12300/j.issn.1674-5817.2024.108

实验动物与比较医学 ›› 2024, Vol. 44 ›› Issue (4): 445-454.DOI: 10.12300/j.issn.1674-5817.2024.108

动物实验伦理的三个维度：基于生命价值、动物福利和风险防范的阐析

赵勇()()

上海实验动物研究中心, 上海 201203

收稿日期:2024-07-25 修回日期:2024-08-06 出版日期:2024-09-06 发布日期:2024-08-25
作者简介:赵勇，高级工程师，上海实验动物研究中心实验动物使用和管理委员会主席、科研管理部副部长，中国实验动物学会理事，中国兽医协会理事兼实验动物专业委员会副会长，上海市实验动物学会理事兼设施与资源专业委员会主任委员。取得中国兽医协会实验动物专科医师资格，受聘为中国实验动物学会实验动物资源鉴定与评价评审专家，兼任华东师范大学应用伦理专业学位硕士研究生行业产业导师。从事上海市实验动物行政许可及行政审批的事中事后监管工作多年，对各种类型的实验动物设施具有丰富的管理经验。主持完成“实验动物设施动态氨浓度检测新技术研究”“屏障环境中实验动物质量控制哨兵动物设置方法研究”“实验动物设施与环境动态质量、运行能力的检测与评价”“生物医药研发过程中动物实验伦理原则贯彻研究”等多项省部级科研项目，发表《屏障环境“实验动物机构质量和能力的通用要求”的践行与探索》《屏障环境的哨兵动物应用设置》《动物实验伦理判定与人格特质相关性研究》等多篇实验动物管理与应用相关文章，获得多项实验动物领域相关专利。(ORCID: 0009-0009-9034-6593), E-mail: zhaoyong@slarc.org.cn

Three Dimensions of Animal Experiment Ethics: Analysis Based on Value of Life, Animal Welfare, and Risk Prevention

ZHAO Yong()()

Shanghai Laboratory Animal Research Center, Shanghai 201203, China

Received:2024-07-25 Revised:2024-08-06 Published:2024-08-25 Online:2024-09-06
Contact: ZHAO Yong (ORCID: 0009-0009-9034-6593), E-mail: zhaoyong@slarc.org.cn

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

动物实验伦理审查是基于动物实验的必要性、科学性以及实验人员专业技能和科研条件等因素，对动物实验做出可为或不可为的伦理判定。由于文化传统、宗教信仰、人格特质以及在动物实验过程中分工角色等的不同，人们对待实验动物和动物实验的态度也存在较大差异。动物实验伦理如何与生命科技发展方骖并路，并始终发挥科技伦理的前瞻引导作用和底线保障功能，是需要不断探索、实践和研究的课题。目前，保障实验动物福利已成为社会普遍关注的伦理共识。但是，对待不同类别动物实验的态度和原则理念，以及在开展活体动物实验过程中如何真正有效地保证动物福利质量，则更应该纳入实验动物科技伦理管理范畴。本文基于生物技术在实验动物领域的深度应用，考量动物实验行为对科技伦理理念发展的促进作用，系统阐释了实验动物的特殊生命价值地位以及实验动物与生物安全、生态安全的关系，并列举了不同种类实验动物的福利质量评估方法，证明生命价值观的哲学思想是动物实验伦理的核心，动物实验的质量和意义决定着实验动物生命价值实现的伦理水平，动物福利技术则为动物实验提供高水平的伦理保障。伦理学理论与实验动物生命科技的紧密结合是动物实验伦理的客观要求。生命价值、动物福利与风险防范共同构成了动物实验伦理审查的核心内容，是提高动物实验伦理审查质量，避免出现伦理偏差的根本因素。

关键词: 实验动物, 伦理审查, 生命价值, 动物福利, 风险防范

Abstract:

Ethical review of animal experiments is based on factors such as the necessity of the experiment, its scientific validity, the professional competence of the experimenters, and research conditions, to determine the ethical permissibility of an animal experiment. Attitudes towards laboratory animals and animal experiments vary significantly due to differences in cultural traditions, religious beliefs, personality traits, and roles within the experimentation process. How animal experiment ethics can advance in tandem with the advancements of life sciences, while consistently providing forward-looking guidance and safeguarding fundamental ethics, is a subject that requires continuous exploration, practice, and research. Ensuring the welfare of laboratory animals has now become a widely accepted ethical consensus. However, attitudes and principles towards different types of animal experiments, and the methods to genuinely and effectively ensure the welfare quality of animals during live animal experiments, should be central to animal experiment ethics. Based on the deep integration of biotechnology in the field of laboratory animals, this paper considers the contribution of animal experimentation to the development of scientific ethical concepts. It systematically elucidates the special value of life in laboratory animals and their relationship with biosafety and ecological safety. It also outlines welfare quality assessment methods for different species of laboratory animals, demonstrating that the philosophical ideology of the value of life is the core of animal experiment ethics. The quality and significance of animal experiments determine the ethical level at which the value of life in laboratory animals is realized, and animal welfare technologies provide a robust ethical guarantee for animal experiments. The close integration of ethical theories with life sciences in laboratory animals is an objective requirement for animal experiment ethics. The value of life, animal welfare, and risk prevention collectively form the core elements of ethical review in animal experiments, serving as fundamental factors in improving the quality of ethical reviews and avoiding ethical deviations.

Key words: Laboratory animals, Ethical review, Value of life, Animal welfare, Risk prevention

中图分类号:

Q95-33

赵勇. 动物实验伦理的三个维度：基于生命价值、动物福利和风险防范的阐析[J]. 实验动物与比较医学, 2024, 44(4): 445-454. DOI: 10.12300/j.issn.1674-5817.2024.108.

ZHAO Yong. Three Dimensions of Animal Experiment Ethics: Analysis Based on Value of Life, Animal Welfare, and Risk Prevention[J]. Laboratory Animal and Comparative Medicine, 2024, 44(4): 445-454. DOI: 10.12300/j.issn.1674-5817.2024.108.

参考文献 33

1	PERSSON I, SAVULESCU J. The meaning of life, equality and eternity[J]. J Ethics, 2019, 23(2):223-238. DOI: 10.1007/s10892-019-09296-0 .
2	MONEAGLE H L. From Canada to Scotland: the incorporation of ethical wildlife control principles: a review[J]. Laws, 2023, 12(3):52. DOI: 10.3390/laws12030052 .
3	国家质量监督检验检疫总局, 中国国家标准化管理委员会. 实验动物福利伦理审查指南: GB/T 35892—2018[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2018.
	State Administration for Market Regulation, National Standardization Administration. Laboratory animal—Guideline for ethical review of animal welfare: GB/T 35892—2018 [S]. Beijing: Standards Press of China, 2018.
4	REVAH O, GORE F, KELLEY K W, et al. Maturation and circuit integration of transplanted human cortical organoids[J]. Nature, 2022, 610(7931):319-326. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-022-05277-w .
5	SUN D X, GAO W, HU H X, et al. Why 90% of clinical drug development fails and how to improve it?[J]. Acta Pharm Sin B, 2022, 12(7):3049-3062. DOI: 10.1016/j.apsb.2022.02.002 .
6	CEKANOVA M, RATHORE K. Animal models and therapeutic molecular targets of cancer: utility and limitations[J]. Drug Des Devel Ther, 2014, 8:1911-1921. DOI: 10.2147/dDDT.s49584 .
7	王蕾, 彭玉凌. 死亡哲学与生命伦理的思辨[J]. 成都大学学报(社会科学版), 2015(6):1-6.
	WANG L, PENG Y L. An analysis of the death philosophy and life ethics[J]. J Chengdu Univ (Soc Sci), 2015(6):1-6.
8	LAI C X, TANAKA S, HARRIS T D, et al. Volitional activation of remote place representations with a hippocampal brain-machine interface[J]. Science, 2023, 382(6670):566-573. DOI: 10.1126/science.adh5206 .
9	PERSSON E. Synthetic life and the value of life[J]. Front Bioeng Biotechnol, 2021, 9:701942. DOI: 10.3389/fbioe. 2021.701942 .
10	HERNANDEZ-LALLEMENT J, ATTAH A T, SOYMAN E, et al. Harm to others acts as a negative reinforcer in rats[J]. Curr Biol, 2020, 30(6):949-961.e7. DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2020.01.017 .
11	孙德明, 李蔚鸥, 王天奇, 等. 实验动物福利伦理审查的标准化与我国新国标解读[J]. 中国比较医学杂志, 2018, 28(10):133-137. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-7856.2018.10.023 .
	SUN D M, LI W O, WANG T Q, et al. Standardization of ethical review for laboratory animal welfare and interpretation of the new national standards in China[J]. Chin J Comp Med, 2018, 28(10):133-137. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-7856.2018.10.023 .
12	国家市场监督管理总局, 国家标准化管理委员会. 实验动物环境及设施: GB 14925—2023[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2023.
	State Administration for Market Regulation, National Standardization Administration. Laboratory animal—Environment and housing facilities: GB 14925-2023[S]. Beijing: Standards Press of China, 2023.
13	LANGFORD D J, BAILEY A L, CHANDA M L, et al. Coding of facial expressions of pain in the laboratory mouse[J]. Nat Methods, 2010, 7(6):447-449. DOI: 10.1038/nmeth.1455 .
14	SOTOCINAL S G, SORGE R E, ZALOUM A, et al. The Rat Grimace Scale: a partially automated method for quantifying pain in the laboratory rat via facial expressions[J]. Mol Pain, 2011, 7:55. DOI: 10.1186/1744-8069-7-55 .
15	PATERSON E A, O'MALLEY C I, MOODY C, et al. Development and validation of a cynomolgus macaque grimace scale for acute pain assessment[J]. Sci Rep, 2023, 13(1):3209. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-30380-x .
16	EVANGELISTA M C, WATANABE R, LEUNG V S Y, et al. Facial expressions of pain in cats: the development and validation of a Feline Grimace Scale[J]. Sci Rep, 2019, 9(1):19128. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-55693-8 .
17	BREMHORST A, SUTTER N A, WÜRBEL H, et al. Differences in facial expressions during positive anticipation and frustration in dogs awaiting a reward[J]. Sci Rep, 2019, 9(1):19312. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-55714-6 .
18	DOLENSEK N, GEHRLACH D A, KLEIN A S, et al. Facial expressions of emotion states and their neuronal correlates in mice[J]. Science, 2020, 368(6486):89-94. DOI: 10.1126/science.aaz9468 .
19	胡骢, 马大青. 实验动物全身麻醉和镇痛的规范和建议[J]. 中华麻醉学杂志, 2022, 42(3):257-259. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn131073.20220214.00301 .
	HU C, MA D Q. Specifications and suggestions for general anesthesia and analgesia in experimental animals[J]. Chin J Anesthesiol, 2022, 42(3):257-259. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn131073.20220214.00301 .
20	FLECKNELL P A. 3-Anaesthesia[M]//FLECKNELL P A.Laboratory Animal Anaesthesia. 2nd ed. London:Academic Press,1996:15-73.
21	FLECKNELL P A. Introduction[M]//FLECKNELL P A.Laboratory Animal Anaesthesia. 2nd ed. London:Academic Press,1996:21.
22	COHEN S, HO C. Review of Rat (Rattus norvegicus), Mouse (Mus musculus), guinea pig (Cavia porcellus), and Rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus) Indicators for Welfare Assessment[J]. Animals, 2023, 13(13):2167. DOI: 10.3390/ani13132167 .
23	方喜业, 陈化新, 杨果杰. 流行性出血热与实验室感染[J]. 中国实验动物学杂志, 2001, 11(3):180-183. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-7856.2001.03.015 .
	FANG X Y, CHEN H X, YANG G J. Epidemic hemorrhagic fever and its laboratory infection[J]. Chin J Comp Med, 2001, 11(3):180-183. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-7856.2001.03.015 .
24	李阳丽, 胡兵. 湖北省肾综合征出血热宿主带毒监测及病毒分子进化特征研究[J]. 中国病原生物学杂志, 2024, 19(5):539-543. DOI: 10.13350/j.cjpb.240509 .
	LI Y L, HU B. Surveillance of host virulence and molecular evolution of hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome in Hubei Province[J]. J Pathog Biol, 2024, 19(5):539-543. DOI: 10.13350/j.cjpb.240509 .
25	胡泉博, 陈淑红, 华华, 等. 2018年和2019年黑龙江省肾综合征出血热宿主鼠类监测分析[J]. 中华卫生杀虫药械, 2022, 28(3):218-221. DOI: 10.19821/j.1671-2781.2022.03.008 .
	HU Q B, CHEN S H, HUA H, et al. Surveillance on host rodents of hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome in Heilongjiang Province in 2018 and 2019[J]. Chin J Hyg Insectic Equip, 2022, 28(3):218-221. DOI: 10.19821/j.1671-2781.2022.03.008 .
26	叶润, 张逸龙, 勒斌, 等. 舟山市岱山县鼠类种群结构及携带病原体初步调查[J]. 中华卫生杀虫药械, 2022, 28(3):258-263. DOI: 10.19821/j.1671-2781.2022.03.018 .
	YE R, ZHANG Y L, LE B, et al. Investigation of rodent-borne pathogens and population structure in Daishan County of Zhoushan City[J]. Chin J Hyg Insectic Equip, 2022, 28(3):258-263. DOI: 10.19821/j.1671-2781.2022.03.018 .
27	杨卫红, 杨晓龙, 杨丽芬, 等. 云南省2020年肾综合征出血热病例分析和部分地区宿主动物调查[J]. 中国媒介生物学及控制杂志, 2022, 33(3):394-399. DOI: 10.11853/j.issn.1003.8280.2022.03.015 .
	YANG W H, YANG X L, YANG L F, et al. Case analysis of hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome and investigation of host animals in Yunnan Province in 2020[J]. Chin J Vector Biol Contr, 2022, 33(3):394-399. DOI: 10.11853/j.issn.1003.8280.2022.03.015 .
28	PELLETIER J F, SUN L J, WISE K S, et al. Genetic requirements for cell division in a genomically minimal cell[J]. Cell, 2021, 184(9):2430-2440.e16. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2021.03.008 .
29	BRISTER E. Disciplinary capture and epistemological obstacles to interdisciplinary research: lessons from central African conservation disputes[J]. Stud Hist Philos Biol Biomed Sci, 2016, 56:82-91. DOI: 10.1016/j.shpsc.2015.11.001 .
30	王炜晔, 翟大业, 刘金龙. 我国生物多样性保护自然-社会科学交叉融合与发展[J]. 生态学报, 2024, 44(13):5459-5475. DOI: 10.20103/j.stxb.202305050931 .
	WANG W Y, ZHAI D Y, LIU J L. Research on interdisciplinary integration and development of natural-social sciences for biodiversity conservation in China[J]. Acta Ecol Sin, 2024, 44(13):5459-5475. DOI: 10.20103/j.stxb.202305050931 .
31	丁璐璐, 赵思琪, 彭耀进. 人-动物嵌合体研究的技术-伦理张力[J]. 科学学研究, 2024, 42(1):46-53. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-2053.2024.01.007 .
	DING L L, ZHAO S Q, PENG Y J. Tension between technology and ethics of human-animal chimera research[J]. Stud Sci Sci, 2024, 42(1):46-53. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-2053.2024.01.007 .
32	中华人民共和国科学技术部.«脑机接口研究伦理指引»和«人—非人动物嵌合体研究伦理指引»发布[A/OL]. (2024-02-02)[2024-07-30]. .
	Ministry of Science and Technology of the People´s Republic of China. Ethics guidelines for brain-computer interface research and ethics guidelines for human-non-human animal chimera research were released[A/OL]. (2024-02-02)[2024-07-30]. .
33	曹文斌. 动物伦理中的权利与福利问题研究[D]. 湘潭: 湘潭大学, 2019. DOI:10.27426/d.cnki.gxtdu.2019.001645 .
	CAO W B. Research on rights and welfare issues in animal ethics[D]. Xiangtan: Xiangtan University, 2019.DOI:10.27426/d.cnki.gxtdu.2019.001645 .

[1]	邓少嫦, 林丹荣, 梁楚军, 雷伟侨, 杨锦淳, 赵维波. 《广东省实验动物管理条例》制度特点及近十年实施情况分析[J]. 实验动物与比较医学, 2024, 44(4): 455-462.
[2]	孙强. 中国实验猴产业的历史、现状、挑战与机遇[J]. 实验动物与比较医学, 2024, 44(4): 343-356.
[3]	于灵芝, 魏晓锋, 黎明, 孔志豪. 啮齿类实验动物健康监测用脏垫料哨兵动物法和排风粉尘PCR法比较[J]. 实验动物与比较医学, 2024, 44(3): 321-327.
[4]	刘美佟, 陈长, 张兆强, 范荻, 胡旃, 马海玲. 湖南省实验动物生物安全突发事件应急预案的编制说明[J]. 实验动物与比较医学, 2024, 44(3): 328-334.
[5]	刘美佟, 陈长, 张兆强, 范荻, 胡旃, 马海玲. 湖南省实验动物机构生物安全管理现状调查[J]. 实验动物与比较医学, 2024, 44(2): 202-208.
[6]	陈兵, 邹弈星, 姚凌云, 王敬东. 四川省实验动物管理政策分析[J]. 实验动物与比较医学, 2024, 44(2): 209-213.
[7]	马丽颖, 赵明海, 梁春南, 岳秉飞, 王洪. 完善实验动物废物处置质量管理体系的思考:以中国食品药品检定研究院为例[J]. 实验动物与比较医学, 2024, 44(2): 214-219.
[8]	曾龙, 李俊鹏, 王晓炜, 陈宁, 王平, 秦美蓉. 实验动物设施智能控制系统建设与运行经验探讨：以深圳市药品检验研究院为例[J]. 实验动物与比较医学, 2024, 44(2): 220-226.
[9]	黄跃, 董烨, 舒加乐. 实验动物设施运行维护和保养模式探讨[J]. 实验动物与比较医学, 2024, 44(1): 92-96.
[10]	唐倩倩, 张秀莉, 常在. 清华大学实验动物中心小鼠自动饮水系统漏水情况统计分析[J]. 实验动物与比较医学, 2024, 44(1): 85-91.
[11]	赵亚, 张彩勤, 孟寒, 秦靖, 白冰, 赵勇, 葛煦, 师长宏. 课程思政视域下实验动物学教学实践探索[J]. 实验动物与比较医学, 2023, 43(6): 641-646.
[12]	谢建芸. 东方田鼠作为一种实验动物新资源的研究进展报告[J]. 实验动物与比较医学, 2023, 43(5): 482-491.
[13]	赵勇. 实验动物管理工作的沿革与展望——以上海市近10年发展为例[J]. 实验动物与比较医学, 2023, 43(5): 492-503.
[14]	谢淑武, 沈如凌, 林金杏, 范春. 雄性不育药物研发相关实验动物模型建立和应用进展[J]. 实验动物与比较医学, 2023, 43(5): 504-511.
[15]	冯丽萍, 朱琦, 林金杏. 实验用鱼的福利研究现状及思考[J]. 实验动物与比较医学, 2023, 43(5): 524-530.

动物实验伦理的三个维度：基于生命价值、动物福利和风险防范的阐析

Three Dimensions of Animal Experiment Ethics: Analysis Based on Value of Life, Animal Welfare, and Risk Prevention

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献 33

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价