7/10/08
President Robert H. Bruininks
202 Morrill Hall
100 Church Street S.E.
University of Minnesota
Minneapolis, MN 55455
President Bruininks,
I have recently received a response to my original inquiry from your
Vice President for Research, R. Timothy Mulcahy. I must say that his
response is one of the
clearest cases of administrative doubletalk that I have ever seen.
Mulcahy does not address my request for a tour of University of
Minnesota laboratories, nor does he address any of the specific concerns
that are raised by my original communication. This is not an issue that
will go away simply because you choose to ignore it. Neither will I
allow you to avoid your responsibility by passing this issue off to an
administrator who is apparently either unwilling to, or incapable of,
directly answering questions.
So, my first question is, will you or will you not allow me to tour the
laboratories of the University of Minnesota so that I can assess the
health/welfare of the animals used within your facilities (with news
media present)? The documents which I have previously obtained from the
University of Minnesota have revealed serious situations involving the
health and well being of primates. These issues cannot be effectively
resolved without observation of the animals. Apparently the “strict
protocols” and the multiple levels of government oversight mentioned by
Mulcahy have not served to protect these animals. And though the IACUC
has raised questions about several of the primate experimentation
projects (see below), these questions have still not led the University
of Minnesota to list any primates as experiencing unrelieved pain or
distress for the last two years, despite depriving primates of water,
bolting restraining bars into the bones of their skulls, and confining
them to restraint chairs, or allowing them to potentially experience
drug overdose and/or withdrawal.
Another reason that I believe that a tour is necessary is that several
projects utilize procedures which involve substantial potential
pain/distress for the primates, rhesus monkeys, that are used in these
experiments. Two federally funded projects (though it appears that these
projects may use the same animals) whose principal investigator is
Timothy Ebner are prime examples of potential problems. These
experiments involve confining primates to restraint chairs, depriving
them of water, and isolating them socially. According to the protocol
this project is considered a category B experiment. However, the
University of Minnesota IACUC asked Ebner if this project should not be
a pain class C experiment: “The committee noted that due to water
deprivation and single housing, these animals are potentially pain class
C.” Apparently your pain class C corresponds to column E on the
USDA/APHIS form 7023. However, these animals are not being reported in
this way. However, as I have stated previously, the Animal Welfare Act
requires that:
Sec. 2.36 Annual report.
(7) State the common names and the numbers of animals upon which
teaching, experiments, research, surgery, or tests were conducted
involving accompanying pain or distress to the animals and for which the
use of appropriate anesthetic, analgesic, or tranquilizing drugs would
have adversely affected the procedures, results, or interpretation of
the teaching, research, experiments, surgery, or tests. An explanation
of the procedures producing pain or distress in these animals and the
reasons such drugs were not used shall be attached to the annual report;
In the documentation that I have previously sent to you, medical and
veterinary experts declared these procedures to definitely be causative
of pain and distress. Apparently your IACUC agrees. Will you be changing
the annual reports filed by the University to reflect these opinions for
the future? And will you be amending your previously filed inaccurate
USDA reports to reflect more accurate information in this regard?
It is also clear that Ebner’s project may not be following research
standards for neurological research. The protocol titled “Role of the
Cerebellum in visually guided arm movements . . . “ states that the
primates will receive 25 ml/kg of body weight daily. This is a very
severe reduction in fluid intake since “ . . . daily fluid consumption
in primates has been reported at 75 ml/kg of BW.” (Kerr 1972, Wayner,
1964 in Guidelines for the Care and use of Mammals in Neuroscience and
Behavioral Research). This reduction of water intake by as much as two
thirds is unconscionable.
Similarly, with regard to experimentation performed by Marilyn Carroll,
the University of Minnesota IACUC states in correspondence to Carroll:
“You have listed animals on this study as pain class A animals. The
committee is concerned that animals may be considered pain class B if
imaging is conducted or if animals experience withdrawal symptoms that
they may be considered pain class C.” Again, will the University of
Minnesota be reclassifying the animals used in this experimentation as
column E for USDA reporting purposes? Records in my possession clearly
indicate that the subjects of this research suffer from symptoms of very
severe psychological stress which have lead abnormal behavior (ripping
out of their hair, etc.). Will this stress cause these animals to be
listed in column E of the USDA reports for the University of Minnesota?
However, these issues by themselves do not address the concerns raised
in my last communication. These issues were:
“It is clear that the experiments of Hendrix, Ebner and Carroll would
fall into the category of unrelieved pain and distress for the animals
involved. Failure to accurately report this experiment to the USDA is a
violation of the Animal Welfare Act. I am also very concerned about
these primates having adequate access to water.
In light of these issues, I officially request that your office suspend
these projects while instituting an investigation to ascertain whether
they are following all legal requirements. I also officially request the
opportunity to tour the laboratories in question, and examine the
veterinary records for the macaque monkeys used in these experiments.
I would also like to request a meeting with University of Minnesota
officials to discuss the permanent elimination of such research
practices at University of Minnesota. To prevent any confusion about
these issues, the procedures that should be eliminated from all
University of Minnesota laboratories are:
1. The use of food and/or water deprivation in non-human primates for
any reason but pre-surgical fasting. Depriving non-human primates of
sustenance for extended periods as is currently practiced by University
of Minnesota laboratories is inhumane, unethical, and has been declared
causative of pain and distress by scientific experts.
2. The surgical attachment of devices such as restraining bars and
recording cylinders to the skulls of non-human primates. These devices
have also been declared by experts to cause pain and or distress in
primates.
3. The use of primate restraint chairs in projects involving
non-human primates. These devices severely restrict the movement of
primates and have been declared by experts to cause substantial
distress.
The University of Minnesota uses a significant number of primates in
experiments every year. I believe it is very likely that some of these
animals are killed unnecessarily, when they could be retired to a
primate sanctuary to live out their lives in a place that is designed to
meet their needs. Therefore, I respectfully request that the University
of Minnesota institute a fully funded retirement program for all
primates that are not currently utilized in ongoing research projects.”
I would like to add the research of Geoffrey Ghose to this list, because
his experimentation utilizes these same procedures.
These issues were essentially left unanswered by Mulcahy. This is why I
have again turned to your office in hopes of getting these issues fully
addressed.
Also, so that I may continue to monitor the primates within the
University of Minnesota, I have one further request.
This letter is made pursuant to the access to governmental data act of
the state of Minnesota, Minn. Stat. Ann. 13.03 et seq.
This letter is to direct you, your officer(s) and/or your officer(s)
and/or agents to provide me with copies of any and all documents and/or
records as described below:
For all primates used at the University of Minnesota, I request all
animal morbidity reports, all physical exam forms, all NHP alopecia
pattern reports, and all primate necropsy reports for the last year.
Also requested are all incoming shipping invoices for all primates
receive within this period, as well as copies of all initial exams for
newly obtained primates, as well as all documents received with incoming
primates for the same period. Also requested are copies of all
correspondence between the University of Minnesota and the USDA for the
last two years. Also requested are all documents generated during the
last year relevant to the monitoring of water consumption of primates
within the laboratories of Timothy Ebner and Geoffrey Ghose.
If any of these documents are available in electronic format please
provide them in this format.
The requester is prepared to pay for all actual search and copying fees,
pursuant to Minn. Stat. Ann. 13.03 subd. 3, up to an initial amount of
one hundred dollars ($100.00). If the fees will exceed this amount
provide me with a detailed estimation of the fee, in advance before
performing said work.
The requester asserts that all records requested above are public
records as defined by Minn. Stat. Ann. 13.03 subd. 1. Should you come to
an opposite decision, please segregate all claimed exempt portions,
provide me with a detailed written statement of your position with
specific reference to the exemptions of the law(s) or any other
provision that prohibits said disclosure that you believe to apply,
pursuant to Minn. Stat. Ann. 13.03 subd. 3.
I look forward to hearing from you within the next five business days.
With Respect For All Life,
Michael A. Budkie, A.H.T.,
Executive Director, SAEN
CC: R. Timothy Mulcahy, Ph.D.
See also :
University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN
Return to
Articles and Reports
