What is medres – medical research GmbH’s position on animal testing?
medres – medical research GmbH medres does not conduct animal experiments and does not have a holding permission according to § 11 Animal Protection Act (TierSchG). If you would like to inform yourself, how the procedures around the approval of animal experiments are defined, we recommend the web pages of “Tierversuche Verstehen”. In general, medres is in favor of animal experiments being carried out. Without them, research and science would not be where they are today. For example, we all owe medical progress in particular to preclinical research.
Of course, rnon-animal methods to reduce animal testing in the sense of the 3Rs principle are always desirable, but at present there is rarely a basis for this. Research is working intensively on further developments (e. g. Organ-on-Chip) and hopefully in the not too distant future the number of animals needed will be further reduced.
We develop our products together with research institutions. Historically, we have always started with a “request for a solution” from research and we then developed customized solutions and prototypes. We are purely research-driven, and thus we have already developed many non-commercial solutions that did not become products and probably never will. The freedom to do so is a great value for our company. We only turn the best solutions into products.
Close ties with research institutions and the researchers there are a high priority for us. As manufacturer and “problem solver”, we see ourselves as the missing link between large-scale industry and the “do-it-yourself” approach in our own institute. We are still a “campus-company” and we offer an open discussion platform for researchers. Therefore, we welcome every contact, e. g. if there are wishes or ideas that industry cannot or does not want to fulfil because commercially they are not for the desired margin but still important for animal welfare. We always have an open door especially for the veterinary staff, who often fall on “deaf ears“ with the big companies, and we are happy to be there, trying to help.
We would like to especially emphasize the great support of the Cologne Cluster of Excellence “CECAD“ at the University of Cologne and the veterinarians of the University and the University Hospital Cologne. As independent bodies, they carry out the necessary experiments that are required in the context of any development.
This is also how, for example, our GasDocUnit® was initially designed. All euthanasia methods available so far have their disadvantages and in particular they do not consider the effects of euthanasia on the person performing the procedure. Therefore, we developed a humane, user-independent, fully automated and tamper-proof system, without buttons, screens or other controls that allow manual changes by users. And in terms of employee leadership assistance, the employees feel more comfortable using such device because it takes away the burden of a correct execution. Therefore, alternatives to the GasDocUnit® should always be examined:
❤ If they are developed and tested by a scientific institution
❤ If they allow for euthanasia in the home cage/IVC
❤ If the IVC lid needs to be lifted or even replaced by a new lid
❤ If the operator can really see every cage/IVC within the euthanasia “chamber”
❤ If they need flow meters, flow restrictors or further additional devices which are error-prone
❤ If they can guarantee for a homogeneous distribution of CO2
❤ If they allow for manual adjustments to the settings (for example the flow‐rate) which create the risk of misuse and human error
❤ If they can be operated anywhere within the lab or if they need to be operated under a hood
❤ If they need active scavenging or even active disposal of the CO2
❤ If they really need heated components to prevent “Tank Freeze Ups”, given that freezing starts at a usage of 20 L/min.
❤ If they really guarantee for a minimum time spent, since the overall consumed time of any euthanasia process is as well determined by the testing for occurred death and documentation after the euthanasia itself