As one of the signatories of the 2014 Concordant on Openness on Animal Research, the Academy of Medical Sciences is committed to transparency around how we conduct, fund and support the use of animals in research.
In 2024 we awarded 20 grants that proposed the use of animals*, the same number as in 2023. As the number of grants funded by the Academy in 2024 was slightly higher than 2023, this means the proportion of grants funded which proposed the use of animals remains has decreased slightly from 13% to 10%.
As in previous years, the majority of the grants we fund that propose the use of animals are in our Springboard and Starter Grants for Clinical Lecturers schemes. Generally, around 90% of grants funded that propose the use of animals fall under these two schemes, and in 2024, only one proposing the use of animals was made outside of these two schemes (under the AMS Professorship scheme).
Of the 2024 studies proposing the use of animals:
- 15 proposed using mice
- 3 proposed using zebrafish
- 2 proposed using rats
- 1 proposed using xenopus (clawed frog)
ALT: Two pie charts illustrating the proportion of Academy-funded grants which proposed the use of animals in 2024 versus 2023.
As part of our ongoing commitment, the Academy publishes yearly statistics on the number of research grants we have funded that proposed the use of animals, and which species they proposed to use.
The Academy uses expert peer review to assess all of our research grant applications. In cases where the applications mention the use of animal research, we ensure that the benefits of the research to human and animal health outweigh any potential harm to animals during the research. We only fund research that complies with the law, and all work is carried out in line with strict Home Office guidelines.
We send relevant applications to be reviewed by the National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research (NC3Rs)**. The resulting feedback is provided to members of our grant scheme Selection Panels, to inform their review and discussion of the application. In 2024 we used the NC3Rs peer review service for one proposal (using dogs) but it was not recommended for funding.
The Academy supports the principle that animals should only be used in research when no alternatives exist to find out the same information. We support the principles of the 3Rs to refine, reduce and replace the use of animals in research and our awardees are required to follow ARRIVE guidelines (Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments) in order to minimise unnecessary studies whilst improving the design, analysis and reporting of animal research to maximise the information published.
For more information about the Academy's position, please see our statement on the use of animals in research.
For more information on the Concordat, please visit the Understanding Animal Research (UAR) website.
* Defined as applications for which the proposed use of animals would fall under the ‘Animal (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986’ (ASPA), whether based in the UK or internationally. This act regulates the use of any protected animal in research or scientific procedure which may cause pain, suffering, distress or lasting harm to the animal. Protected animals are defined by the act as any living vertebrate apart from man and living cephalopods. Where awards involve the use of animals outside of the UK, applicants are required to demonstrate in their application that work is conducted to standards equivalent to those in the UK.
** Including applications which propose the use of non-human primates, dogs, cats, equines and pigs.
Image credit: Understanding Animal Research