Few have been able to evade the harsh criticism of the university’s research on dental implants and experiments on dogs in recent weeks. Employees involved with this work, and even others working in other areas, have been subjected to harsh criticism, hate and threats. Researchers and animal handlers, as well as managers and other employees in the core activities and support operations, have been affected. The university has received thousands of e-mails and comments on social media.
I would like to emphasise that I fully understand that animal testing may be perceived as controversial, arouses strong emotions and profoundly affects many people. Nor is this something that a responsible researcher can casually dismiss. A strict regulatory framework surrounds animal testing, and animal testing ethics committees process all applications. Researchers are working to reduce, refine and replace animal testing and always try to find alternative methods.
Reaching out with facts in the midst of a raging controversy is hard. A flood of arguments rooted in emotion drowns out arguments in this case that periodontal disease is a major public health issue, that the research has ethical permission and that the supervisory authority in this case confirms that we practice good animal husbandry.
At the same time, dialogue is important for us. In the current case, Sweden’s Animal Rights Alliance has always conducted its campaign in a democratic way and encouraged good behaviour. Animal rights organisations play an important role in questioning the use of animals in research. Patient organisations also have an important voice when it comes to the development of new pharmaceuticals and methods of treatment. Clearly it is difficult to reach a consensus on the issue.
Regarding our role as an employer, this massive criticism represents a working environment problem. I am aware that the situation has been very difficult for the most affected employees, who have been subjected to accusations and who daily have encountered inaccurate portrayals of their everyday lives, which they know is not consistent with reality.
This makes it particularly important for more of us to speak out in support of our activities, both when the wind is with us and against us.
We will never accept the threat of violence. Representatives from the Swedish Board of Agriculture sum this up well in an op-ed article in Göteborgs Posten (28 February 2019):
“In Sweden and in the European Union, we have democratically decided that animals may be used in research if this is done under strictly regulated norms. The research conducted must always be based on the needs of society and must never be controlled or limited by the threat of violence from criminal parties.”
In April the University of Gothenburg is hosting a broader dialogue about animal testing in research. I look forward to a democratic, perceptive and respectful dialogue.
Dödshot mot forskare på GU (Death threats against researchers at GU) (SVT 22 Feb)
This post is also available in: Svenska