Electro-ejaculation, a medical procedure of electrically stimulating the male reproductive organ, is commonly used in primate labs to get semen from male monkeys. This process is also heavily protested by animal-welfare supporters.

The Wisconsin Regional Primate Center, one of eight in the United States, is the center of high-profile debate between animal-welfare supporters and biomedical researchers.

“No one needs a primate research center. Labs are not real world; they’re not normal primates,” Dr. John McArdle, science advisor for the American Anti-Vivisection Society, said. “They are, by definition, abnormal — we don’t keep humans in similar conditions.”

The research center, located at UW-Madison, receives over $5 million annually in federal money and grants for research on rhesus macaque and marmoset monkeys.

Several recent scientific advances have been made by the center through primate research. Last September, the center announced its discovery of a new HIV vaccine target, which introduces new approaches to attacking the AIDS virus. This research was achieved by injecting rhesus macaques with SIV, simian immunodeficiency virus, the monkey equivalent of the HIV virus, WRPRC public-relations affiliate Jordana Lenon said.

Many scientists say the biological mechanisms of animals, human or non-human, are similar enough to apply research across different species.

“If you look at the mechanisms preserved through the whole chain of species, you can find these mechanisms in the most primitive organism,” UW animal health and biomedical sciences professor emeritus Dr. James Will said. “[Through animal research] we have clues as to how this mechanism pertains to higher orders of life.”

Detailing the debated procedure

Lenon’s views about the electro-ejaculation differ from those of Matt Rossell, field coordinator for In Defense of Animals and a former employee of the Oregon Regional Primate Research Center.

“It feels likes a tiny vibrating sensation when you put it on your finger,” Lenon said. “Most of the monkeys get scared and ejaculate before it is even used.”

Rossell said he thought some parts of the body might be more sensitive to the procedure than a finger. Lenon added the same procedure is sometimes used on humans in fertility clinics.

Rossell said during his two years at the Oregon facility, he saw the electro-ejaculation procedure performed over 100 times.

“I’ve seen them do it over and over again [to the same primate] because it doesn’t always work the first time,” Rossell said. “The behaviorist at ORPRC had no doubt it was an extremely painful procedure.”

Still, UW professors and employees firmly say their animal research program is humane, heavily reviewed, inspected and respectful of the animals.

“[UW-Madison has] developed a community of scientists who understand and support the principle that inhumanity to animals is something they would abhor,” Will said.

He added that in the 1980s, animal-rights organizations played an important role in teaching scientists to be conscious of what the public sees as humane treatment.

McArdle also said he has seen “vast improvements” in treatment of research animals over the past decade.

Enforcing research standards

“Every scientist on campus cares about the welfare of animals, or their research wouldn’t be legitimate,” Mark Cook, chairman of the Animal Care and Use Protocol Review Committee, said. “There is a huge, redundant layer of groups and committees making sure people are complying with protocol.”

The UW committee aims to thoroughly inspect and reviews all animal research experiments in order to ensure the Animal Welfare Act standards are met.

The procedures involved in approving an experiment are rigorous and thorough, Cook said. The number of animals used in an experiment, the procedures performed on an animal, and the purpose of the experiment are only a few of the questions on the required paperwork for animal-use approval.

Fiscal considerations

New procedures take time and money, and this is why many universities refuse to acknowledge new options in biomedical research.

“Primate experimentation brings a tremendous amount of money into the universities. The eight primate centers in the U.S. get a total of $245 million from the National Institute of Health,” Budkie said. “The university clearly has a vested interest in getting as many experiments approved as possible.”

Supporters of alternatives to animal research question the validity of information gathered from animals living in unnatural conditions.

Will said he feels there is no denying the medical progress animal research has afforded, but many people, especially those who protest animal use, are not aware of the discoveries.
“Without animal research, we’d be back at the end of the 18th century with drugs,” Will said.

Lenon said it is sometimes hard to make a direct correlation between animal research and new medicines because many medical “breakthroughs” take decades to achieve.

“People take for granted that modern medicine has all the answers, but it doesn’t,” Lenon said. “Some vaccines take 20 or 30 years to develop through research and animal experimentation.”

McArdle questions whether it is necessary or wise to “do everything right away, just because you can.”

Some discoveries UW’s primate research center has been involved in are culturing of embryonic stem cells, mechanics of HIV infection, new resources for HIV vaccines, neuroendocrine triggers of premature puberty, and new therapies for glaucoma.

Both Lenon and Will say animal research is full of shades of gray.

Dr. McArdle agreed. “This is not a black and white issue. But someday it will be, when animal research is the alternative.”