Animal bills would affect pharmaceutical and scientific research in the country

Colombia has one of the lowest research budgets in Latin America, below Mexico, Chile and Brazil. The ban on the use of animals for scientific research could become a new obstacle to the development of health sciences, which already lack sufficient state support.

You may read: Biologists sound alert: bill would prohibit the use of wild animals in education and biological studies

The science and technology budget in 2020 was just 0.29% of GDP, according to the World Bank. In 2023, the budget of the Ministry of Science and Technology increased from that of 2021, going from $330,549 thousand pesos to $399,961 thousand pesos. However, it is still lower than that of 2012 which was $425,192 thousand pesos.

Last July 20, the representative to the Chamber Juan Carlos Lozada filed before the Congress of the Republic a bill seeking to impose restrictions on the use of animals in scientific research.

Faced with the reaction and the questions raised by the scientific community, the legislator opted to withdraw the proposal. However, on July 25 of this year, Senator Andrea Padilla Villarraga presented a new bill with similar objectives, focused on prohibiting the use of animals in scientific research, educational activities and biological studies.

This proposal has generated an intense debate in the scientific community of the country, being the Institute of Natural Sciences of the National University of Colombia one of the actors that have expressed a clear rejection of this initiative.

The reason behind this opposition is that the project, despite its intention to safeguard the rights of animals involved in research, could have undesired consequences. Its application could limit appropriate scientific research methodologies and potentially hinder the advancement of research in Colombia.

For more information on the subject, we interviewed Dr. Gabriel Tafur, Veterinary Doctor, Zootechnician, Master, PhD in Veterinary Sciences and co-inventor of a veterinary vaccine that has an international patent.

Más Colombia: What has been the reaction of the scientific community with respect to these bills?

Gabriel Tafur: The first thing is to comment that these bills have received little attention from the general public and, secondly, to point out the lack of participation of interested representatives of civil society and the academic community in the construction of these bills.

Among the points addressed by the bills is a regulation containing specific prohibitions on the use of animals in parabiological research, favoring instead alternative methods.

This contrasts with the situation in developed countries which, despite having alternatives, have not completely replaced the animal model in research.

It is relevant to insist that the proposal of the bill does not adequately involve the Colombian academic community. In particular, neither the Veterinary Medicine programs nor the researchers who work with experimental animals in the particular context of Colombia have been taken into account.

You may also read: Now men will also receive the vaccine against the Human Papilloma Virus in Colombia

MC: What alternative methods to animal experimentation are used in leading countries in scientific research?

GT: In countries such as the United States and China, which are leaders in scientific research, they have not yet managed to completely replace the animal model in research, despite having greater resources than Colombia.

The use of alternative methods, such as cell culture, implies high costs. In addition, the animal model offers advantages by replicating conditions of drug use in other animals or humans that to date have not been effectively replaced with alternative methods.

Although measures have been implemented to reduce the use of animals in research in large scientific centers, in places such as the European Union these methods have not yet completely eliminated the use of animal models.

MC: Colombia is not a world leader in scientific research, can projects like these become an additional barrier to the advancement of research in Colombia?

GT: Indeed! In the case of Colombia, our contribution to global knowledge and science is limited, representing only a maximum of 2%. Colombia ranks fifth in scientific production in Latin America and, as a whole with the entire region, we barely contribute 5% to global knowledge.

This is partly due to the fact that Latin American countries have historically been consumers and adapters of technology, rather than generators of scientific research.

Economic liberalization affected research in Colombia, especially in sectors such as agriculture and livestock, which reduced national scientific production. Since 1990, when economic liberalization began, national food production began to be replaced by food imports, and today we see that we have more imports with the FTAs.

Importing generic and obsolete technology has limited the country’s competitiveness. In view of this, projects such as those mentioned should consider Colombia’s specific challenges and its own scientific and technological needs, so as not to hinder the country’s development in these fields.

MC: You developed an internationally patented veterinary vaccine, which involved tests on animals. What impact could this type of bills have on the scientific production of vaccines and other pharmaceutical products?

GT: I am concerned about the possibility that these bills could imply a tacit prohibition of the use of animals in parabiological research, without considering the current regulations and standards in Colombia.

Drugs, both biological and pharmaceutical, must comply with strict safety and efficacy requirements according to international pharmacopoeia. Tests in animal models are essential to guarantee the absence of contaminants and undesirable side effects in the products.

The pharmaceutical industry must ensure the quality of its products, and these animal tests are a minimum standard. Bills of this nature should take into account how regulation works in Colombia and how product safety is guaranteed before affecting scientific and pharmaceutical research in the country.

In conclusion, it is important to draw the attention of legislators to the need to understand the reality of research in Colombia and the negative implications of bills such as this one.

We scientists are willing to contribute to the discussion and we hope that the opinions and needs of the scientific community will be considered. We are all in favor of animal welfare and scientific research. It is essential to balance these priorities in legislation.

Keep reading: The trade deficit in the beverage industry is increasing, but there is export potential