§ Mr. BakerTo ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) how many licence applications involving the administration of tobacco smoke to conscious animals were granted in (a) 1996, (b) 1997 and (c) 1998; how many animals, broken down by species, were involved in the research in each year; into which severity banding the research fell; and how many animals died as a result of the research in each year; [109078]
(2) what account he took of section 5(4) of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 before deciding to grant project licence applications PPL/70 04972 and PPL/70 04956; and if he will make a statement; [109079]
(3) how many animals broken down by species were involved in PPL 170 04972 and PPL170 04956; how the tobacco smoke is administered to the animals; how many convulsive spasms each animal is expected to suffer; into which severity banding his research falls; how many animals have died to date as a result of the research; and if he will make a statement. [109077]
(4) if he will make it his policy to ban live testing for the effects of tobacco smoke; and if he will make a statement; [109080]
(5) if he will withdraw licences authorising companies to conduct live animal testing into the effects of tobacco smoke; and if he will make a statement. [109076]
§ Mr. Mike O'BrienThe Government stand firmly by their ban on the testing of tobacco products which was announced in November 1997. There will be no approval for any such tests. Two recently approved applications are for programmes that do not test the effects of tobacco smoke, but enable the development of treatments for chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases such as bronchitis and emphysema, which seriously debilitate many people. These health problems derive mainly from smoking, 257W including passive smoking, as well as occupationally related lung diseases, such as those caused by the inhalation of coal dust. Tobacco smoke is the only test material to model reliably the effects that will enable a better understanding of the disease processes and improved medical treatments. The licensed research programmes are to investigate medical treatments, not the safety approval of tobacco products.
The Inspectorate and the Animal Procedures Committee have advised that the licences are justifiable and that the benefits to man and animals would outweigh the costs to the animals involved. As with all project licence applications, these two licences were issued only after a full and careful assessment, including whether there were alternatives which replace animal use, reduce the number of animals needed or refine the experimental design to minimise suffering.
Strict conditions were made in authorising these two programmes of research. The maximum number and species of animal that may be used per year are 1,100 mice and 1,100 guinea-pigs in one; and 2,000 mice, 1,000 rats and 1,000 guinea-pigs, in the other. Tobacco smoke is to be administered by placing the animals in inhalation chambers for set periods. They are not expected to suffer convulsive spasms. the severity bands for both project licenses are classed as moderate. To date, no animals have died as a result of the research.
Table 5a of the Statistics of Scientific Procedures on Living Animals shows the number of animals used in non-toxicology procedures each year. Figures for the use of tobacco as a pharmacological tool or standard are not separated out, but there were no instances where tobacco smoke was administered to conscious animals in 1996, 1997 and 1998. No licenses were issued for the administration of tobacco smoke to conscious animals and no animals were used for tobacco research in any of these three years.
Table 10a of the annual statistics gives details of the number of animals used in toxicology (safety) testing. In submitting the data for this table, licensees are instructed to include tests on tobacco alternatives with data for protocols that have used tobacco in any form. Again, the tables show that no animals were used for the safety testing of tobacco of tobacco substitutes during 1996, 1997 and 1998.
Evaluating research proposals involving the use of animals is difficult and requires a delicate moral balance to be struck. Scientific developments have saved many human lives and cured many illnesses and have contributed to the health of animals and the protection of the environment. Much knowledge has come from experiments on animals. To have failed to allow that work may have resulted in many humans dying and suffering where instead they have been cured or helped. The Government want to prevent unnecessary experiments involving animals but it would be immoral, in our view, to deny victims of diseases like bronchitis and emphysema the assistance that new scientific knowledge could bring from work such as projects PPL 70/04972 and PPL 70/04956.