- Premium Academic Help From Professionals
- +1 323 471 4575
- support@phdwriters.us
The Animal Welfare Act of 1966 Discussion Essay
The Animal Welfare Act of 1966 Discussion Essay
Order ID 53003233773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages to Order 5-10 Pages Description/Paper Instructions
The Animal Welfare Act of 1966 Discussion Essay
Can’t testing be limited to techniques that don’t use whole animals? The Society of Toxicology joins other researchers and organizations that seek to obtain validated scientific information while minimizing the number of animals used in research. One way is by using in vitro tests, laboratory tests using cell or organ cultures rather than whole organisms. In other cases, organisms such as worms or bacteria are used instead of mammals. Computer models can also be developed to predict outcomes of testing. However, each of these methods provides limited information that applies to a very specific test situation and may not fully anticipate the results in a complicated organism (such as humans) with many interacting organ systems. It also takes time to develop methods and prove that they are suitable replacements for other accepted methods. Fifteen U.S. agencies are working together as the Interagency Coordinating Committee for Validation of Alternate Methods (ICCVAM) to establish criteria for scientific validity and regulatory acceptance of new tests. So far, two such tests, the murine local lymph node assay and the dermal corrosivity test, have been recognized as alternatives to replace some whole animal tests. Internationally, similar reviews of proposed methods are in progress.
Will we need animals in the future? Yes, animals will continue to be important agents in toxicology studies as new chemicals, combinations and concerns are studied. At a minimum, whole animal testing will still be needed to validate the results of methods that do not use whole animals and as a last protective step before exposure of humans and animals to potentially dangerous substances.
The future promises many exciting ways to predict and quantify human susceptibility to agents causing specific molecular alterations. With the entire sequence of the human genome now available for study, in the coming years specific human gene mutations may be induced and quantified in cell culture, thus implying that these same genes may be susceptible after, say, environmental exposures of a person to a particular chemical. Using organisms into which human genes have been incorporated (transgenic systems), exposure and consequent change in expression of these specific genes may be analyzed. Information about the dose-response in the whole animal may then be compared to actual incidence of genetic variation in exposed human populations. Such methods will enable the scientist to use hard experimental evidence to predict human diseases caused by genes mutated by environmental exposures to chemicals and their metabolic products. These methods will also enable better treatment of diseases by targeting medicines for the best response with lowest toxicity based on the patient’s genetic makeup.
Toxicology is part of the solution! Toxicology helps sustain the high-quality of life attributable directly to the appropriate use of chemicals. Toxicologists will continue to play an important role in defining the conditions of use that permit us to enjoy a high standard of living. For humane, ethical, scientific and economic reasons research animals will be used only when necessary and in the lowest numbers scientifically possible. However, the responsible use of animals in research will continue to be required to protect human and animal health and to safeguard the environment.
❛ Scientifically-valid research designed to reduce, refine or replace the need for laboratory animals is encouraged. ❜ SOT Animals in Research Public Policy Statement
11
Selected Other Research Societies and Groups American Association for Laboratory Animal Science (AALAS) — www.aalas.org American Association of Poison Control Centers — www.aapcc.org American Physiological Society (APS) — www.the-aps.org/index.htm American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) — www.avma.org Americans for Medical Progress (AMP) — www.amprogress.org Association for Assessment & Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care International (AAALAC) — www.aaalac.org Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC) — www.ccac.ca/en/CCAC_Main.htm Institute for Laboratory Animal Research (ILAR) — dels.nas.edu/ilar_n/ilarhome/index.shtml Johns Hopkins Center for Alternatives to Animal Testing (CAAT) — caat.jhsph.edu National Association for Biomedical Research (NABR) — www.nabr.org Public Responsibility in Medicine and Research (PRIM&R) — www.primr.org Scientist Center for Animal Welfare (SCAW) — www.scaw.com States United for Biomedical Research — www.statesforbiomed.org (Check this web site for the state biomedical society in your region.)
Selected References The Animal Welfare Act of 1966 (P.L. 89-544) as amended by the Animal Welfare Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-579); 1976 Amendments to the Animal Welfare Act (P.L. 94-279); the Food Security Act of 1985 (P.L. 99-198), Subtitle F (Animal Welfare PL99198); and the Food and Agriculture Conservation and Trade Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-624), Section 2503, Protection of Pets (PL101624).
Rules and regulations pertaining to implementation are published in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 9 (Animals and Animal Products), Chapter 1, Subchapter A (Animal Welfare). Available from: Regulatory Enforcement and Animal Care APHIS, USDA — www.aphis.usda.gov/ac
USDA/APHIS Final Rule Amending the Definition of Animal — a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/06jun20041800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2004/pdf/04-12693.pdf
USDA/APHIS Animal Welfare Regulations and Standard for Birds, Rats & Mice — www.aphis.usda.gov/ac/rmbanpr.pdf
USDA Animal Welfare Information Center — www.nal.usda.gov/awic/index.html
The Importance of Animals in Biomedical and Behavioral Research. Public Health Services statement. 1994 — www.the-aps.org/pa/humane/pa_phspolcy.htm
Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. Institute of Laboratory Animal Resources, Commission on Life Sciences, National Research Council, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1996 or succeeding revised editions. — www.nap.edu/readingroom/books/labrats
Education and Training in the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. Animal Welfare Information Center, United States Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Library — www.nal.usda.gov/awic/pubs/noawicpubs/educ.htm
American College of Laboratory Animal Medicine Public Statement: Medical Records for Animals Used in Research, Teaching and Testing — aclam.org/PDF/pub_med_records_2.pdf
Public Health Service Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. PHS, DHHS, Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare, 1996, amended 2002 — www.grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/references/phspol.htm
Recognition and Alleviation of Pain and Distress in Laboratory Animals. Committee on Pain and Distress in Laboratory Animals, Institute of Laboratory Animal Resources, Commission on Life Sciences, National Research Council. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C. 1992 — fermat.nap.edu/books/0309042755/html/R1.html
European Convention for the Protection of Vertebrate Animals Used for Experimental and Other Scientific Purposes. Council of Europe, ETS No. 123, 1986 — conventions.coe.int/treaty/en/treaties/html/123.htm
Guide to the Care and Use of Experimental Animals. CCAC (Canadian Council on Animal Care) Vol. 1, 2nd ed. Edited by E. D. Olfert, B. M. Cross, and A. A. McWilliam. Ontario, Canada: Canadian Council on Animal Care, 1993. 211 pp. — www.ccac.ca/en/CCAC_Programs/Guidelines_Policies/GUIDES/ENGLISH/toc_v1.htm
National Association of Biomedical Research Animal Law Web site — www.nabr.org/AnimalLaw
National Library of Medicine, Bibliography on Alternatives to the Use of Live Vertebrates in Biomedical Research and Testing — toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/altbib.html
Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM) — iccvam.niehs.nih.gov
European Centre for Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM) — ecvam.jrc.cec.eu.int/index.htm
Be sure to check the Society of Toxicology Web Site at www.toxicology.org for additional relevant links.
For Further Information
The Society of Toxicology 1821 Michael Faraday Drive Suite 300 Reston, VA 20190 Phone: (703) 438-3115 Fax: (703) 438-3113 E-mail: sothq@toxicology.org Web Site: www.toxicology.org
All text and graphics are ©2006 by the Society of Toxicology. All rights reserved. No text or graphics may be copied or used without written permission from the Society of Toxicology. For further information, please contact SOT headquarters.
The Importance of Animals in Research • Research involving laboratory animals is necessary to ensure and enhance human and animal
health and protection of the environment.
In the absence of human data, research with experimental animals is the most reliable means of detecting important toxic properties of chemical substances and for estimating risks to human and environmental health.
Research animals must be used in a responsible manner.
Scientifically-valid research designed to reduce, refine or replace the need for laboratory animals is encouraged.
SOT Animals in Research Public Policy Statement 1999
The Animal Welfare Act of 1966 Discussion Essay
RUBRIC
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper.
GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
CLICK ON THE LINK HERE: https://gradebasket.com/orders/ordernow
Also, you can place the order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow / www.phdwriters.us/orders/ordernow
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME] and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!
