Scientific and Regulatory Procedures: Use of Dogs

Alice Macdonald Excerpts

Monday 28th April 2025 Westminster Hall

[Irene Campbell]

I absolutely agree with everything that my hon. Friend said.

It is important to note that the Labour manifesto pledge commits the Government to

“partner with scientists, industry, and civil society”

to phase out animals in medical testing. The Government also state:

“This is a long-term goal, and it will need further scientific and technical advancement and validation to reach this point”.

The group Understanding Animal Research supports the use of animal research currently in the UK. It says:

“In the UK, dogs are primarily used to find out how new drugs act within a whole, living body and whether new medicines are safe enough to test in humans…Their genome has been sequenced and…they are often used in genetic studies…Dogs are primarily used in regulatory research”

and as a secondary species, alongside rodents. The dogs are mostly tested for areas such as Duchenne muscular dystrophy, anti-rabies vaccines, heart research and veterinary medicine. Understanding Animal Research also states:

“Research dogs live in large enclosures together with their pack mates. Lab technicians look after the dogs and play with them every day. The dogs are fed and watered daily, and the environment (lights, temperature etc.) is controlled automatically. The cages are cleaned daily, and the space is big enough to have a toilet area separate from the bed and play area. Dogs are intelligent enough to keep these areas separate, and there’s plenty of space to allow them to do so. Because the dogs live together, their social needs are met by other dogs. Unlike pets, they do not require the constant company of humans.”

However, Animal Free Research UK disputes that quality of care and says:

“Applications for project licences to conduct animal experiments are very rarely refused. Answers to Written Questions”—

submitted in Parliament—

“indicate that over the past seven years, only one licence application has been rejected.”

[Alice Macdonald (Norwich North) (Lab/Co-op)]

I thank my hon. Friend for making such a powerful speech. This morning I met Nutmeg, a lovely beagle. Does my hon. Friend recognise that a large proportion of the dogs who undergo medical scientific procedures are beagles—I believe 3,565 out of 3,770? Does she also agree that, if the Government will not commit right now to an immediate ban, we must at least have a clear timeframe for when such a ban may come into place?

[Irene Campbell]

I agree with everything that my hon. Friend said. Animal Research UK continued:

“Applicants are allowed to adjust and re-submit licence applications to enable them to be granted (for the last four years applications had a mean number of 2.55 iterations before they were granted).”

The Animals in Science Regulation Unit’s 2023 annual report stated that there were 169 cases of non-compliance with the law or licence conditions—only a 3% decrease from 2022. Those cases involved a total of 154,904 animals, representing an overwhelming 864% increase on 2022.

Beagles were used in a study conducted by AstraZeneca to test a new, more eco-friendly propellant for use in inhalers. The tests lasted up to 39 weeks and involved 72 beagles. The dogs were restrained by a tether and forced to inhale the gas for two hours each day through a mask fitted over their nose and mouth, which was held in place by a muzzle. Although the study states that the dogs had freely available access to water, it also states that water was withheld during the tests and for 16 hours overnight. That meant that the dogs went without water for at least 18 hours each day. At the end of the study, all the dogs were killed so that their tissues could be dissected for further study. The authors noted that the inhalers contribute only a small fraction of global hydrofluoroalkane emissions, so was that treatment of the dogs really justified?

In 2017, the Home Office released figures showing the 1.81 million additional animals were bred but not used for scientific procedures in Britain, but we had no additional data since then. Those 1.81 million animals included 97 beagles, but we have no idea what happened to those that were not used.