Personal reflections on russell and burch, FRAME, and the HSUS

Alternatives to Laboratory Animals

Volumn 37, Issue SUPPL. 2, 2009, Pages 29-33

  Stephens, Martin L ^a  

^a Humane Society of the United States   (United States)

Author keywords

Alternatives; Burch; FRAME; HSUS; Principles; Russell; Three Rs; UFAW

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL USE; COMMUNITY; EXPERIMENTAL ANIMAL; EXPERIMENTATION; FUND FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF ANIMALS IN MEDICAL EXPERIMENTS; HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE UNITED STATES; ORGANIZATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; TOXICITY; TOXICITY TESTING; UNITED KINGDOM; UNITED STATES; UNIVERSITY;

ANIMALIA;

EID: 77749329990     PISSN: 02611929     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/026119290903702s21     Document Type: Review

References (20)

1. Russell, W.M.S. & Burch, R.L. (1959). The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique, 238pp . London, UK: Methuen.
2. Balls, M. (2009). Preface to the abridgement. In The Three Rs and the Humanity Criterion, pp. vii-xv. Nottingham, UK: Fund for the Replacement of Animals in Medical Experiments.
3. Russell, W.M.S. (2000). Forty years on. In Progress in the Reduction, Refinement and Replacement of Animal Experimentation. (ed. M. Balls, A.M. van Zeller & M. Halder), pp. 7-14. Proceedings of the 3rd World Congress on Alternatives and Animal Use in the Life Sciences. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier Science.
4. Stephens, M.L., Goldberg, A.M. & Rowan, A.N. (2001). The first forty years of the alternatives approach: Refining, reducing, and replacing the use of laboratory animals. In The State of the Animals 2001 (ed. D.J. Salem & A.N. Rowan), pp. 121-135. Washington, DC, USA: Humane Society Press.
5. Goodwin, F. (1989). Interview: Animal research versus humane use: The struggle to sustain our research advances. The FASEB Journal 3, 2455-2456; 2563-2564.
6. Anon. (1992). Foreword. In The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique (Special Edition), pp. iii-iv. Potters Bar, Herts., UK: Universities Federation for Animal Welfare.
7. United States Congress (1966). Public Law 89-544, Animal Welfare Act of August 24, 1966. Beltsville, MD, USA: United States Department of Agriculture, Animal Welfare Information Center, National Agricultural Library. Available at: http://awic.nal.usda.gov/nal-display/index.php?info-center= 3&tax-level=4&tax-subject=182&topic-id=1118&level3-id= 6735&level4-id=11092&level5-id=0&placement-default=0 (Accessed 04.09.09).
8. Stephens, M.L. (2006). Remembering William Russell. ATLA 34, 474-476.
9. Balls, M., Goldberg, A.M., Fentem, J.H., Broadhead, C.L., Burch, R.L., Festing, M.F.W., Frazier, J.M., Hendriksen, C.F.M., Jennings, M., van der Kamp, M.D.O., Morton, D.B., Rowan, A.N., Russell, C., Russell, W.M.S., Spielmann, H., Stephens, M.L., Stokes, W.S.H. Straughan, D.W., Yager, J.D., Zurlo, J. & van Zutphen, B.F.M. (1995). The Three Rs: The Way Forward. The report and recommendations of ECVAM Workshop 11. ATLA 23, 838-866.
10. Stephens, M.L. (1986). Alternatives to Current Uses of Animals in Research, Safety Testing, and Education: A Layman's Guide, 86pp. Washington, DC, USA: Humane Society of the United States.
11. Stephens, M.L. (1987). The significance of alternative techniques in biomedical research: An analysis of Nobel Prize awards. In Advances in Animal Welfare Science 1986/1987 (ed. M.W. Fox & L.D. Mickley), pp. 19-31. Boston, MA, USA: Martinus Nijhof.
12. Balls, M. (2009). The Three Rs and the Humanity Criterion (an abridged version of The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique by W.M.S. Russell and R.L. Burch), 131pp. Nottingham, UK: FRAME.
13. Stephens, M.L. & Balls, M. (2006). LD50 testing of Botulinum toxin for use as a cosmetic. ALTEX 23, Special Issue, 153-156.
14. Jukes, N. & Martinsen, S. (2008). Three's a crowd: The 1R of replacement for education and training. AATEX 14, Special Issue, 249-252.
15. Gruber, F.P., Scheiwiller, S., Hagmann, I., von Aulock, S., Baumgart, M. & Krummenacher, G. (eds) (2006). Proceedings of the 5th World Congress on Alternatives and Animal Use in the Life Sciences, Berlin 2005. ALTEX 23, Special Issue, 1-466.
16. National Research Council (2007). Toxicity Testing in the 21st Century. A Vision and a Strategy, 196pp. Washington, DC, USA: National Academies Press.
17. Collins, F.S., Gray, G.M. & Bucher, J.R. (2008). Transforming environmental health protection. Science, New York 319, 906-907.
18. US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (2008). Memorandum of Understanding on High Throughput Screening, Toxicity Pathway Profiling, and Biological Interpretation of Findings, 7pp. Available at: http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/files/ntp- ncgcepamou.pdf (Accessed 04.09.09).
19. National Research Council (2006). Toxicity Testing for Assessment of Environmental Agents, 244pp. Washington, DC, USA: National Academies Press.
20. Medawar, P. (1972). The Hope of Progress, 131pp. London, UK: Methuen.