Of Mice, Monkeys, and Better Science : Nonhuman Animal Experimentation and its Alternatives in the Netherlands (1950-2020)

Abstract

This thesis is about the history of nonhuman animal experimentation and its alternatives in the Netherlands, and specifically at the Dutch National Institute of Public Health and Environment (RIVM), in the period 1950-2020. It is characterized by a ‘multispecies approach’, in which I attempt to conduct non-anthropocentric historical research. Nonhuman animals are viewed as individuals with their own histories, which matter regardless of their importance for human histories. This means that the focus of this thesis is on the experiences of nonhuman animals used in experiments and on how these changed over time. A case study approach is taken to allow for a zooming in on the interactions between animals (including humans) on the micro level of the laboratory. The following cases are studied: the RIVM Polio-monkeys, the RIVM Animal Experiments Committee, the XPA-mice and carcinogenicity testing. In addition, the thesis contains a chapter outlining the theoretical framework, including an elaboration on the ‘multispecies approach’ taken as well as a chapter sketching macro level developments in nonhuman animal experimentation in relation to developments in regulations, science and Dutch society. Together, the chapters provide insights into recent Dutch nonhuman animal experimentation and alternatives history, on both the micro and the macro level, a subject that has been under researched. They lead to three overarching conclusions. First of all, they show that while there were several major developments in nonhuman animal experimentation practices in the Netherlands between 1950 and 2020, there were also important continuities. As we see in every case study, society, law, politics and science, remained anthropocentric practices throughout the period studied. Consequently, the possibilities for manifestation of agency by tested animals were severely limited on the micro level and completely foreclosed on the macro level. Secondly, this thesis shows that it is impossible to generalize about the effects of macro level developments (such as the popularization of the 3Rs) on the lives and experiences of individual nonhuman animals experimented upon. Zooming in on the micro level of the laboratory showed that how these developments played out differed for individuals, depending on factors such as species and personal preferences. Finally, this research shows that, despite a broad consensus among scientists, politicians and within society that ideally science would be practiced without the use of nonhuman animals, transitioning towards animal-free science proved difficult and dependent on much more than techno-scientific factors. The case studies showed that factors such as risk aversion, costs and (lack of) a sense of urgency also played a role in (un)successful transitions towards research without the use of nonhuman animals. Based on these conclusions, the thesis ends with a questioning of the currently dominant approach to the transition away from nonhuman animal experimentation. In this approach, nonhuman animal experimentation remains legitimized if humans deem it necessary and thus does not move beyond anthropocentrism. Instead, I propose that we explore what a transition based on a non-anthropocentric ethics would mean, including a move towards democratic and political practices that are inclusive of nonhuman animals.