"Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth." - Marcus Aurelius

People's Opinion

When making a project that significantly changes the agenda for antibody production and use, it is important to shed light on the opinion of the general population. Is there in fact a demand for an alternative among the public? To get these answers we conducted a survey asking people about their opinion on the use of laboratory animals in scientific research and antibody production.

The Respondents

The survey was open for one month and shared via our accounts on facebook and twitter. To get answers from all over the world we sent our survey to various iGEM teams and asked them, if they would be interested in helping us by sharing it. The survey brought in answers from 291 people. These people were primarily from Europe, but also people from North and South America, Asia and Australia responded to the survey. The majority of the respondents were young people in the ages of 19-29 and roughly 2/3 was either working or studying in the fields of life sciences such as biochemistry, molecular biology, bioengineering or medicine.

Results

From the above data, 60 % have an ambivalent view on the use of laboratory animals in scientific research. When asked specifically on the use of laboratory animals to produce antibodies, 87 % of the respondents answered ‘Yes’ and think it is okay to use them. At first sight, this data indicates that people actually do not mind the use of laboratory animals when it concern production of antibodies. However, when asked if they would prefer if antibodies were produced in an alternative organism like E. coli, 71 % of the respondents agreed.

85 % of the respondents do not know of any alternative to antibodies. This could suggest that the people’s attitude towards the use of laboratory animals to produce antibodies reflect their lack of knowledge of alternatives, and not their general opinion. One person even states: "the use of animals is okay. We don't have any other opportunities at the moment".

When looking at the elaborated opinions towards laboratory animals, different concerns is expressed. These matters are : The quality, price, and animal ethics. Some people even state the environmental impact as an issue.

Conclusion

From this questionnaire, it is indicated that an alternative to the current method for antibody production would be appreciated. People are in general ambivalent about the use of laboratory animals, but they incline to the view that it is “better to use animals than not being able to help humans 100 %”, as one respondent writes. However, most people would prefer if E. coli produced antibodies rather than mice and rabbits. The fact that almost 90 % didn’t know of any antibody alternative (remember that 2/3 of the respondents worked / studied in the field of life sciences) also suggests that people have accepted the current way of antibody production - even though they understand the issue with antibody production.

When analyzing the survey data one has to consider the response group and whether or not the data can be transferred into a general opinion. Our aim with the survey was to determine the opinion of the general population on the use of laboratory animals to produce antibodies. Since 2/3 of the respondents were people of science (either by education or job), the data is not representative of the general public. Furthermore, only 291 people responded the survey. From a statistical point of view, more responses would have been preferred. Even though the data is not as credible as we would have liked it still gives us a strong indication that a change in the strong tradition-based antibody production is needed.