Commentary on the Beauchamp-DeGrazia Framework of Principles

Many of us in the animal research community regularly face an internal conflict. We witness developments of new treatments while recognizing that animals experience study-based harms despite our systems of care. Beauchamp and DeGrazia identify significant gaps left by reigning models of harm–benefit principles and the Three Rs. Their six principles must be seriously considered in debates about the conditions of morally justified animal research because they provoke bioethical questions neglected by harm–benefit analyses (HBA) and the Three Rs. However, some problems need more discussion than can be found in Beauchamp and DeGrazia’s framework. For example, more material on basic research and its justification would be helpful, as would analysis of how improvements in study design are paramount for increasing the benefit of HBA.