|
Putting
(animal) house in order
The
stand-off between the health minister C P Thakur and Maneka Gandhi
on the issue of CPCSEA’s overtly unrelenting stance on a host
of issues related to animal experimentation seems to be quite serious
now. The Prime Minister is expected to sort out matters and indications
are that the health ministry could wriggle out controls on biomedical
research from the purview of the CPCSEA. There is no doubt that
an increasingly dictatorial CPCSEA has delivered the last straw
on the back of research institutions who then sought the health
minister’s intervention. Having taken up cudgels on behalf
of researchers, it appears that before long research institutions
in India could be free of CPCSEA’s hold. From animal rights
to prevention of cruelty to animals to Committee for the Purpose
of Control & Supervision of Experimentation on Animals (CPCSEA),
Maneka Gandhi has come a long way and become the bete noire of the
scientific community. There is no doubt that in these last few years,
the Committee did achieve something in the form of awakening researchers
to put their animal house in order. Exposing the state of animal
houses in the country is one thing, but arrogating to itself custodianship
of the research process or planning to ‘‘ take on the
irrationalities in Indian drug research,’’ is another
matter. It’s members from different walks of life having one
common qualification of ‘‘animal lovers,’’ without
any background of the research process cannot sit on judgement.
This is something best left to the researchers themselves.
Had
CPCSEA highlighted problem areas and then allowed the research institutions
to fall in line as per standard norms, it would have been fine.
Another positive outcome is the expose of the government-run research
institutions where some were surely not up to the mark. Its talk
of accreditation for animal facilities thus makes sense as there
have to be baseline norms as close to international ones. Maneka
Gandhi may be right in questioning the quality of research emanating
from such places but cannot go beyond that. The Committee could
have at best been a facilitator to help in policing animal houses.
While giving credit to CPCSEA for delving deep into these aspects
and exposing shortcomings, it should not taint all research institutions
with the same brush because of a few black sheep. Yes, there can
be fund problems in these government institutions which could be
set right by giving priorities. But funds crunch is not the case
with private institutions and there is no doubt that animal facilities
here are better managed and maintained. But the CPCSEA puts in restrictions
when it comes to importing animal models. The last 15 months have
seen no imports and private pharma companies have been forced to
do preclinical experiments abroad. CPCSEA’s lop-sided policies
are responsible for the loss of precious foreign exchange and time.
If reputed government institutions like CSIR and ICMR were on the
Committee and kept quiet then, knowing the state of affairs of the
labs, the new Committee now proposed to oversee animal research
should again not be top heavy with government departments but a
fair representation also be given to all players concerned. The
objective must be to uphold global standards eschewing personal
agendas.
|
