Home About Us Animal Experiments at the DRFZ

Animal Experiments at the DRFZ

Taking the welfare of animals into account

Research Focus of the DRFZ
Around 10 % of the population suffer from autoimmune diseases such as rheumatism, psoriasis, lupus erythematosus, intestinal inflammation or multiple sclerosis, to name a few. Disability and pain becomes a daily companion. Even worse, these patients are more likely to develop cancer and die at an early age.

Medications available to date must be taken lifelong and may alleviate these chronic diseases but cannot cure them. Even the most effective drugs are merely able to temporarily interrupt the mechanisms of inflammation but do not eliminate their causes. In addition, many therapies are associated with significant side effects, as their mechanisms need to act centrally due to the nature of the disease and thus strongly suppress the immune system. This may lead to intolerances or even therapy failure in the long run. This is why scientists and physicians at the DRFZ are investigating the causes of these diseases, in which animal experiments are still indispensable.


Animal Experiments, Alternative Methods, and Animal Welfare

Many alternatives for animal experiments are already in use but cannot completely replace them.

According to the Animal Protection Act, animal experiments are only allowed in cases in which no animal-free methods are available (Animal Protection Act § 7a Passage 2 No. 2). Only by animal experiments, it is possible to find out which circumstances cause the immune system to react against one’s own body. An ex vivo-simulation of how the cells of the immune system communicate with each other and with the other cells of the body in complex organ structures is still not possible to date. However, this knowledge is indispensable for the development of new therapeutic strategies with fewer side effects, of more potent therapies or even of a cure for these yet incurable autoimmune diseases. Likewise, the effects and side effects of drugs on other organ systems and functions can only be tested in a living organism, especially since the complex interactions between the various organ systems have so far been difficult or impossible to simulate in vitro. For this reason, in addition to the fundamental ethical aspects, new therapeutic strategies must first be tested in animal models. If successful, clinical studies are then carried out in the patient.

Less complex interactions, however, can already be investigated without animal experiments, e.g. using cell material from patients or healthy volunteers. For example, many research groups of the DRFZ work completely without animal experiments. They are constantly developing new test systems to analyze cells of the immune system outside the body. However, animal experiments will remain indispensable in the foreseeable future, whilst, at the same time, facilitating the development of possible alternative methods. Also, alternatives are already in use in addition to animal experiments to reduce the number of animals needed.

Alternatives Every scientist is obliged to use alternative methods whenever possible. This animated film gives an overview of this topic.

The 3R Principle This animated film explains the 3R principle and describes how it is implemented in research.
(Source: https://www.tierversuche-verstehen.de/filme/)

Scientists are consulted by independent Animal Welfare Officers who also ensure and monitor the animal welfare at the institution and the compliance with all guidelines and regulations. The Animal Welfare Committee, which meets regularly, supports the Animal Welfare Officers in their work and in surveilling animal welfare.

3R Principles

The scientists at the DRFZ are highly aware of their responsibility towards animals and apply the 3R principle in their animal experiments in order to reduce the suffering of animals in animal experiments to an indispensable level. The 3Rs stand for “Replace, Reduce, Refine”.

In practice, this mean the researchers at the DRFZ try to carry out as many experiments as possible without the use of animals (“Reduce & Replace”), for example by using cell cultures. When carrying out animal experiments, care is taken to use a statistically calculated minimal group size of animals but not more animals than necessary (“reduce”). Today’s highly developed technology now offers many non-invasive research methods (“refine”), which reduce the suffering of the animals and allow for a vast amount of data being generated from a small number of animals (“reduce”).

The Animal Welfare Officers Gudrun Wibbelt from the Leibniz Institute for Zoo and Wildlife Research and Boris Jerchow from the Max Delbrück Center on their work as Animal Welfare Officers.
(Source: https://www.tierversuche-verstehen.de/filme/)

Species, Husbandry, and Handling of Laboratory Animals

The species of animals used in experiments depends on the balancing of two criteria: using the species which suffers least from the experiment whilst being most appropriate for the scientific question.

The DRFZ exclusively works with mice. The genetics, anatomy, and physiology of mice are evolutionarily very similar to those of humans and thus provide an important basis of disease research. Most mice at the DRFZ are genetically modified via special breeding methods or genetic engineering by which specific clinical traits of a human disease can be evoked and examined in a targeted manner. Some mouse strains develop diseases very similar to those in humans and can therefore be used for preclinical testing of novel therapies. However, the clinical presentation in humans is not always depicted 1:1 in the animal – often, it may be more effective to segregate the components responsible for the resulting clinical presentation. For example, by specifically switching off individual genes in so-called knock-out mice, their influence on a certain inflammatory process can be tested. This facilitates a better understanding of the molecular causes of autoimmune diseases and, thus, the development of new and much more specific therapies.

Husbandry and handling of laboratory animals at the DRFZ - Animal welfare and good research go hand in hand.

The mice at the DRFZ are kept in groups, separated by sex. The cages are equipped with fine wood chip bedding. A red plastic house serves as shelter. Due to the special color vision of mice, it is perceived by them as dark on the inside due to their incapability of red spectral vision whilst animal care takers and scientists can check on their well-being without disturbing the cage. Furthermore, nesting material made of cellulose and gnawing sticks are provided in each cage. The animals also have unrestricted access to pelleted food and drinking water.

Strict guidelines are maintained to protect the animals from external influences such as pathogens, which could influence their health status and planned experiments. For this purpose, the animals are kept in individually ventilated cages (IVCs) under so-called SPF (specific-pathogen-free) conditions. In addition, the animal facility is equipped with personnel locks in which the care takers and scientists have to change into special clothing comprised of autoclaved overalls, hairnets, masks, gloves, socks, and shoes. All materials to be transferred into the facility are sterilized by autoclaving or disinfected. In addition, the health status of the mice is determined in regular intervals in order to detect potential pathogens early on.

The handling of laboratory animals is also strictly regulated at the DRFZ. The DRFZ offers a special training program for scientists carried out by the veterinarians concerning the handling of animals, current legislation, and animal welfare which includes a theoretical and a practical part. Successful participation is certified. Only after passing such a training course, a scientist is allowed to handle an animal. In addition, the veterinarians initiate and carry out regular training and further education courses for all employees working with animals with regard to the protection of laboratory animals and the 3R principle.

Laboratory Animal Husbandry and Animal Experiments Employees of the Max Delbrück Center (MDC) in Berlin provide insight into the living and housing conditions of laboratory animals.
(Source: https://www.tierversuche-verstehen.de/filme/)

Severity Assessment

An animal experiment is only permitted by law if the animal´s prospective pain, suffering or harm is ethically justifiable in regard of the purpose of the experiment.

Therefore, the indispensability of a planned animal experiment must be demonstrated and weighed against the expected burden of each individual animal by the following principle: the higher the expected burden on the animal, the greater the scientific benefit must be. The expected burden is assessed in detail and its ethical justifiability is weighed. The burden is not determined by the scientist. Instead, the scientist provides a personal burden assessment, which is critically reviewed by the animal welfare officer and then submitted to the local authorities. These are the ones to determine the severity category for each animal and experiment.

The Directive 2010/63/EU of the European Parliament and the Council of the 22nd of September 2010 on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes distinguishes between the severity categories "mild", "moderate", "severe", and "non-recovery".

Care is taken to keep the burden on the individual animal as low as possible. However, the severity degree of the entire experiment is based on the highest expected burden of an individual animal. This means that – even if some groups of animals are not burdened at all (e.g. control animals) – the entire experiment is still considered a severe burden if one single animal may experience this level of severity.

Source BFR

Definitions of the Severity Degrees
  • “Non-recovery”: this term is used in procedures entirely performed under general anesthesia from which the animal shall not recover consciousness or for the killing of animals for scientific purposes with subsequent removal of organs (without any prior treatment, intervention or manipulation). Latter accounts by far for the largest proportion of animals killed for experimental purposes, and is, despite not being considered an animal experiment according to the Animal Protection Act, included in the annual count of lab animal used.
  • “mild”: procedures on animals as a result of which the animals are likely to experience short-term mild pain, suffering or distress, as well as procedures with no significant impairment of the well-being or general condition of the animals shall be classified as “mild”.
  • “moderate”: procedures on animals as a result of which the animals are likely to experience short-term moderate pain, suffering or distress, or long-lasting mild pain, suffering or distress as well as procedures that are likely to cause moderate impairment of the well-being or general condition of the animals shall be classified as “moderate”.
  • “severe”: procedures on animals as a result of which the animals are likely to experience severe pain, suffering or distress, or long-lasting moderate pain, suffering or distress as well as procedures, that are likely to cause severe impairment of the well-being or general condition of the animals shall be classified as “severe”.

Numbers and statistics

  • In Germany, 2.825.066 animals were used for experimental purposes in 2018.
    This means that the number of laboratory animals in Germany in 2018 will be almost unchanged compared to the previous year (2017: 2.807.297 animals). The statistics include 2.138.714 animals used in animal experiments and 686.352 animals killed for scientific purposes without prior animal experiments.
    Rodents, especially mice and rats, represent by far the largest proportion, accounting for 83 % of all laboratory animals. This was followed by fish with 9 % and rabbits with 4 %, while cats and dogs accounted for 0.16 % of all laboratory animals. Primates accounted 0.11 %; human primates were last used for scientific purposes in Germany in 1991.
  • A total of 222.588 laboratory animals were used in Berlin in 2018 (2017: 222.424)
    Berlin has long been regarded as the “capital of animal testing”. However, the high number of laboratory animals can be explained by the high density of research institutions.

DRFZ animal numbers 2017_2018

Animal Welfare at the DRFZ

Animal experiments are necessary to understand basic biological processes and develop new therapeutic approaches for human disease. However, scientists are obliged to replace animal experiments whenever possible by alternatives and to work towards the development of further alternative methods.

Legal Framework
  • In 2010, an amendment to the “Directive of the European Parliament and the Council on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes” (2010/63/EU), aiming at the harmonization of the in part widely differing regulations of the individual member states of the EU.
  • Animal experiments are regulated in Germany by the Animal Protection Act and the Animal Protection Ordinance, by which Germany has one of the strictest animal protection laws worldwide. In 2002, animal welfare was even incorporated into the German Constitution as a national objective (Article 20a).
  • Any animal experiment must first be approved by the local authorities, in which the scientific benefit must be substantially justified.
  • In addition to an extensive literature research, the application for an animal experiment must also include a biometric, i.e. mathematical evaluation of the number of animals necessary for scientific analysis which, in turn, limits the number of animals to be used.
  • Animal experiments may only be carried out by specially trained and qualified persons. They are subjected to continuous surveillance by the Animal Welfare Officers and the local authorities.
  • Each animal experiment is recorded and the number of animals used is reported annually to the local authorities.

Tierversuche im Gespräch

“Und wenn es keine Tierversuche mehr gäbe?” Es gibt sie, die Menschen, die offen dazu stehen, dass sie aus guten Gründen Tierversuche durchführen. Am 5. November 2019 stellten sie sich in der Berliner Urania den Fragen der Öffentlichkeit und versachlichten so eine mitunter emotional geführte Debatte.

Warum werden immer noch Tierversuche durchgeführt, wo es heute doch so viele Alternativmethoden gibt? Wie geht es den Tieren? Und wem nützen solche Versuche eigentlich? Das öffentliche Interesse an diesen Fragen ist groß, doch zugleich kursieren immer noch viele Mythen zum Thema Tierversuche. In dieser Situation sind Informationen aus erster Hand gefragt, aber auch die offene Diskussion auf Augenhöhe.

Deshalb richteten die Berliner Tierschutzbeauftragten jetzt erstmals im Rahmen der Berlin Science Week eine gemeinsame Veranstaltung zusammen mit großen biomedizinischen Forschungseinrichtungen der Stadt aus. Der Einladung zum Themenabend mit dem Titel „Tierversuche im Gespräch – unbedingt notwendig oder längst überholt?“ in die Urania Berlin folgten rund 250 Interessierte, darunter auch Schülerinnen und Schüler sowie Lehrkräfte.

Vertrauensvolles Publikum
Zum Auftakt fragte die Moderatorin des Abends, die Berliner Wissenschaftsjournalistin Lilo Berg, nach der Einstellung zu Tierversuchen. Lediglich ein Dutzend Gäste plädierte dafür, solche Versuche ganz abzuschaffen. Etwa ein Drittel sah zwar grundsätzlich einen Nutzen, meinte aber, dass es zu viele Tierversuche gibt. Rund zwei Drittel hoben die Hand bei der Antwortoption „Ich vertraue den Wissenschaftlern, dass sie Tierversuche nur einsetzen, wenn es nicht anders geht“.

In der nächsten Fragerunde ging es auch um das populäre Thema Tierversuche und Kosmetika. In der öffentlichen Diskussion kommt es dabei immer wieder zu Irrtümern, wie auch an diesem Abend. Manche waren der Ansicht, dass die Erlaubnis zur Testung im Tierversuch von der Art des Kosmetikprodukts abhängt, oder dass im Ausland am Tier getestete Kosmetika in die EU importiert werden dürfen. Dabei dürfen Kosmetika, die im Tierversuch getestet wurden, seit einigen Jahren nicht mehr in der EU verkauft werden – selbst, wenn sie aus dem Ausland kommen.

Tierversuche im Gespräch - Public survey @ Jacqueline Hirscher

Tierversuche im Gespräch - Prof. Anja Hauser @ Jacqueline Hirscher

Tierversuche im Gespräch - Lilo Berg and Dr. Fabienne Ferrara @ Jacqueline Hirscher

Tierversuche im Gespräch - Panel diskussion @ Jacqueline Hirscher

Tierversuche für die Tiermedizin
Wenig bekannt in der Öffentlichkeit sei auch, dass die Ausbildung am Tier als Tierversuch gelte, sagte Professorin Christa Thöne-Reineke von der Freien Universität Berlin. Die Fachtierärztin für Versuchstierkunde bildet dort unter anderem tierärztliches und tierpflegerisches Fachpersonal aus.

Dabei orientiert sie sich am international gültigen 3R-Prinzip für Versuche am lebenden Tier. Die drei „R“ stehen für die Entwicklung von Versuchen, die schonender für das Tier sind (Refinement), für die Reduzierung von Versuchen (Reduction) und für den Ersatz von Tierversuchen (Replacement). Christa Thöne-Reineke ist auch beteiligt an dem an der Freien Universität Berlin angesiedelten Graduiertenkolleg der Berlin-Brandenburger Forschungsplattform BB3R – dem ersten Graduiertenkolleg zu Alternativen im Tierversuch weltweit – und Kooperationspartnerin im Netzwerk von Charité 3R, einer 2018 gegründeten Initiative zur Verankerung der guten Idee von 3R in Forschung und Praxis. In ihren Kursen setzt die Professorin bereits eine Reihe von Alternativmethoden ein, darunter auch Online-Tutorials, Modelle und Simulatoren. Thöne-Reineke sagte: „Solange der Gesetzgeber die Ausbildung am Tier als Tierversuch einstuft, können wir in der tiermedizinsichen Ausbildung nicht auf Tierversuche verzichten.“

Grundlagen erforschen – auch am Tier
Warum Tierversuche für Grundlagenforschung und klinische Forschung derzeit unverzichtbar sind, erläuterten Professorin Anja Hauser, Tierärztin und Immunologin am Deutschen Rheumaforschungszentrum und an der Charité und Dr. Thomas Kammertöns, Immunologe am Max-Delbrück-Centrum für Molekulare Medizin und an der Charité.

Versuche in Zellkulturen oder an Organoiden eignen sich, um erste Erkenntnisse zu gewinnen, sagten beide Forscher. Die komplexen Prozesse im Immunsystem, in dem sehr viele Zelltypen in verschiedenen Organen aufeinander wirken, ließen sich jedoch nur im Gesamtorganismus beobachten. Anja Hauser schilderte, wie die Forschung an Mausmodellen zu einem neuartigen Medikament geführt hat, das manchen Erkrankten mit Multipler Sklerose hilft. Und Thomas Kammertöns entwickelt derzeit mithilfe von Mausversuchen eine neuartige Krebstherapie, die das körpereigene Immunsystem zum Kampf gegen Tumorzellen anregt.

Schneller zu Alternativen
Alternativmethoden, die Tierversuche in den gesetzlich vorgeschriebenen „Pflichtversuchen“ ersetzen sollen, entwickelt Robert Landsiedel. Der Chemiker und Toxikologe arbeitet mit seinem großen Team beim Ludwigshafener Chemieunternehmen BASF.
Derzeit dauere es oft bis zu zehn Jahre, bis eine Alternativmethode als geeigneter Ersatz von den Behörden anerkannt werde. „Mit der derzeitigen Vorgehensweise werden noch über hundert Jahre vergehen, bis alle regulatorischen Tierversuche zur toxikologischen Testung von Chemikalien abgelöst werden können“, sagte Landsiedel. Er schlug vor, die Anerkennung von Alternativmethoden zu vereinfachen und Prioritäten für die künftige Entwicklung von Alternativmethoden zu setzen.

Im Mittelpunkt der lebhaften Diskussion standen Alternativmethoden zu Tierversuchen und Fragen zur Haltung von Versuchstieren. Auf die Wortmeldung aus dem Publikum „Was passiert, wenn ein Tierversuch genehmigt ist – gilt dann Feuer frei?“ beschrieben die Experten auf dem Podium das streng geregelte und minutiös dokumentierte Procedere, bei dem über jedes einzelne Tier genau Buch geführt werden muss. „Und was wäre, wenn von heute auf morgen keine Tierversuche mehr gemacht werden dürften?“, wollte ein anderer Gast wissen. Dann gäbe es keine neuen Medikamente oder Chemiestoffe mehr, hieß es vom Podium, denn dafür seien Tierversuche gesetzlich vorgeschrieben und nach wie vor sinnvoll. Nach dem offiziellen Ende der Veranstaltung ging die Diskussion bei Brezeln und Bier weiter – rund um die gut besuchten Infostände des Arbeitskreises der Berliner Tierschutzbeauftragten.

“Open Debate”: The quality portal for online debates

Open Debate is the debate portal of the Tagesspiegel publishing group for institutions, organisations, and companies who aim at sharing their debates publicly and making them accessible for a prolonged period of time. Open Debate promotes expert discussions on relevant and interesting issues in science, politics, business or society and culture.

Open Debate not only makes debates visible to a wide audience but also provides quick access to the debates and to the most important positions via the Open Debate Map.

Further information: opendebate@tagesspiegel.de

State of the Debate

In many cases, animal experiments are still indispensable in basic research today. The experiments enable scientists to investigate complex biological processes in animals, in order to better understand the human organism and how it functions. Animal experiments also play a decisive role in medicine, for example in the development of new drugs and therapeutic methods. Nevertheless, opponents of animal testing criticize that scientists should switch to existing alternative methods. They demand the abolition of animal experiments. Are animal experiments really necessary for research? And is man allowed to let animals suffer for his interests? In this debate, renowned experts dealing with animal experiments in different contexts speak out – either as they themselves use animal experiments in their research, as they are of the opinion that animal experiments are replaceable or as they devote themselves to the ethical dilemma that animal experiments present. The debate is intended to contribute to a well-informed and objective discussion on animal experiments and to make the various arguments transparent.

Moderator of the debate: Christoph Herbort-von Loeper, Deputy Press Officer of the Leibniz Association

Please read the contributions of the debate so far.

Please read the article by Andreas Radbruch, Scientific Director of the German Rheumatism Research Center Berlin, a Leibniz Institute, and Professor at the Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin.
“The enemy in my body – animal models show ways to cure autoimmune diseases and cancer”

Causa Tagesspiegel

Leibniz debates

Partner organisations