Scientific and Regulatory Procedures: Use of Dogs

Dan Carden Excerpts

Monday 28th April 2025 Westminster Hall

[Irene Campbell (North Ayrshire and Arran) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered e-petition 705384 relating to the use of dogs in scientific and regulatory procedures.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. Let me begin by declaring an interest, as chair of the all-party parliamentary group on phasing out animal experiments in medical research—I am keen to ensure that that is achieved sooner rather than later.

The petition, entitled,

“Ban immediately the use of dogs in scientific and regulatory procedures”,

was created by Maria Iriart, and as of today has almost 236,000 signatures, which is an incredible achievement. Maria is here today, and I thank her for coming along. The petition goes on to say:

“As a first step to end animal testing, we want an immediate ban for dogs. They are commercially bred in what we see as bleak and inhumane factory-like conditions. We believe there is evidence suggesting that dogs are left being unattended for extended periods in a Government-licenced establishment.

In 2023, 2,456 dogs were used in 3,749 scientific procedures, 734 were classified as causing severe or moderate harm. There were 2,593 procedures for regulatory purposes even though there is no UK legislation that mandates animal testing. These procedures can include oral gavage, when a tube is inserted into the dog’s throat, up to 3 times a day, to administer liquids to the stomach. There are studies questioning the reliability and human-relevant value of the outcomes of these tests.”

When looking at Hansard for other debates on animal testing—particularly testing on dogs—I found an interesting starting point in a debate in 1927 on the Protection of Dogs Bill. In that debate from almost a century ago, Lord Banbury was mentioned as quoting the eminent surgeon Sir Lambert Ormsby, who said:

“Experiments on dogs may now be discontinued. All that can be found out by physiological experiments for application to human beings has long since been discovered, and repetitions are unnecessary and cruel.”—[Official Report, 29 April 1927; Vol. 205, c. 1237.]

Yet, here we are, nearly 100 years later, discussing the very same issue.

An opinion poll conducted for the UK Government by Ipsos MORI in 2018 found that only 14% of the UK public feel that it is acceptable to use dogs for medical research to benefit people. This is unsurprising, as we know that dogs have high emotional and intellectual capabilities, and studies have found that they can feel empathy, sense sadness or fear and demonstrate genuine human bonding.

The UK Home Office regulator is intended to conduct assessments of the compliance of all licence holders, including on-site inspections, and enforces standards for the care and accommodation of all animals bred, supplied or used for scientific purposes. To enforce the regulations, establishments are required to have dedicated individuals, including vets, with legal responsibilities for the care and welfare of animals, as well as an ethical review body.

The Government responded to the petition on 5 March 2025 to clarify that they do not agree to immediately ban the use of dogs for testing and research purposes in the UK. However, hopefully this debate will reignite that discussion and subsequent decisions.

[Dan Carden (Liverpool Walton) (Lab)]

I was visited by my constituent Clara, who brought this issue to my attention, and I was keen to participate in today’s debate. My hon. Friend has made two important points: one of which is that this process has no legislative basis and no public consent. I therefore hope that, when the Government listen to this debate, we can look at how to take action to ensure that man’s best friend is left alone as man’s best friend.

[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.”