Our opinion: Vital medical breakthroughs still need animal research

This viewpoint was originally published in The Oregonian on April 6, 2025.

Medical breakthroughs have transformed billions of lives. In our lifetimes, we’ve seen how new medicines have turned HIV from a death sentence into a treatable condition. We’ve witnessed the creation of gene and stem cell therapies that hold the possibility of treating alcoholism, diabetes and blindness. We’ve marveled over the whirlwind development of the COVID-19 vaccine that tamed a once-in-a-century pandemic.

Researchers at Oregon Health & Science University have had a hand in some of those advances and are continuing to drive innovation in others, from developing a universal flu vaccine to helping childhood cancer survivors regain their ability to have children.

These headline-grabbing successes, however, don’t come quickly or easily. They are the result of painstaking research that explores everything from how an individual molecule connects to a protein to the systemic effects of stimulating certain areas of the brain. Ideas are tested and experiments are recalibrated. Failures are vital information; successes are one step closer to a new therapy.

And before any potential treatment or new therapy is given to a patient, it must first be tested in animals to help understand how it may act in people and discover any potential side effects. This step is required by the scientific and regulatory communities for safety and ethical reasons. Indeed, a dark history of deeply unethical human testing has led to this requirement.

We understand this research is controversial and makes many people uncomfortable; we ourselves are animal lovers as well as scientists. Still, we stand firm that this research is critically important if we are to identify, prevent, treat or eradicate debilitating diseases and improve human health.

Although nonhuman primates represent fewer than 1% of all research animals, this research is increasingly significant as the human population ages and rates of chronic diseases grow. It is also critical for emergent public health issues, playing an essential role in vaccine development.

At OHSU, we understand the profound responsibility that comes with using nonhuman primates. Animal studies are only conducted when other research methods — such as laboratory-based cell culture or computer modeling — cannot reliably replicate a complex system. State and federal regulators and OHSU’s strict policies require transparency and oversight to demonstrate that proposed research using animals benefits science and human health. Care of research animals is heavily regulated, and we welcome that accountability.

With all of this, it may come as a surprise that our ultimate goal is to eliminate the need for animals in research. But we are not there yet.

Scientists using nonhuman primates have long strived to replace them with alternative technologies. We established a program funding innovative “new approach methodology” to reduce the number of animals used and improve animal welfare. Currently, these methods cannot fully substitute for complex living organisms, and, for ethical and safety reasons, require validation to be sure they accurately predict outcomes. Nevertheless, we are pursuing technologies that will someday eliminate the need for animals in research.

Advocates for closing the research center claim that nonhuman primates are systematically mistreated here. Nothing could be further from the truth. Staff and researchers form bonds with our animals and care deeply about their well-being. In rare instances when there is an incident, we follow up with a deep root cause analysis to improve care and reduce future risk. Those who work with these magnificent animals are understandably distressed that their care and caring are being mischaracterized and misunderstood.

Closing the center would be detrimental to the progress of biomedical research, the hundreds of people who work there, OHSU’s finances and ability to fulfill its missions, and the lives impacted worldwide. And it would be expensive: Closing would likely cost more than $100 million to relocate more than 5,600 animals and other logistical hurdles, diverting resources that would otherwise fund our health care, education and research missions.

Closing the center because of emotional appeals would also come at a time when scientific research is being undermined by the federal government. In an extremely uncertain future for science innovation, support for research — including that performed at the center — is more important than ever.

Peter Barr-Gillespie, Ph.D., is executive vice president and chief research officer at OHSU. Skip Bohm, D.V.M., is a diplomate for the American College of Laboratory Animal Medicine and director of OHSU’s Oregon National Primate Research Center.