Response to ”The publication in Homeopathy of studies involving animal experimentation“. Reply to Dr Katy Taylor

Sir,

We thank Dr Taylor for her congratulations and comments about the publication in Homeopathy of studies involving animal experimentation. In her letter, Dr Taylor raises some important points that are worthy of contemplation and, indeed, these points were awarded due consideration in the development of the new policy. We shall endeavour to explain further the deliberative process that led to the development of the policy in regard to these concerns.

Dr Taylor refers to the four broad categories that we describe for why animals are used in research and asks why we do not exclude categories 1 and 2: ‘understanding of how living creatures function’ and ‘as experimental models to study disease processes’.

Firstly, we must point out that these are not ‘our’ categories: they are drawn from commonly cited reasons for animal experimentation that are described by AnimalResearch.info, an international collaboration of scientists and researchers. As we stated in our paper, existing homeopathy research does not fall easily into these categories but there is value in analysis of the motivations for these studies.

Secondly, there seems to be some misunderstanding on Dr Taylor’s part about the purpose of homeopathy research that might fall into categories 1 and 2. In our opinion, there is a need to investigate the mechanism of action of homeopathic remedies, including investigation of disease and of physiology. While we wish to encourage the use of alternatives to animal experimentation whenever possible, we do not wish to exclude it where the potential for benefit clearly outweighs the potential for harm. Discovery of a mechanism of action for homeopathic remedies could potentially reveal the key to the development of treatments that are beneficial to both humans and animals alike. Furthermore, given the urgent need to develop more eco-friendly and sustainable forms of health care, the potential for benefit to the planet and for future generations must also be taken into consideration.

Thirdly, Dr Taylor makes an unwarranted assumption with her statement that there will be ‘undoubted suffering’ from use of animals in homeopathy research. We would like to reassure her that the journal will not publish research that fails the harm: benefit test and that we will be scrupulous in our review of the application of the principle of refinement.

Lastly, we strongly disagree that refusal of any research that involves animals is needed to be in keeping with the law, science and ethical values of homeopathy. Rather than improving ethical standards in animal research, this may simply drive researchers to avoid the peer-review process and publish elsewhere. The new policy will encourage researchers to explore fully the need for their animal research and to seek alternatives to the use of animals to meet their research aims.