If you’ve ever taken an aspirin for a headache, you’ve benefited from animal research.

Animal research has played a major part in almost every important medical advance in the last century, from the discovery of antibiotics and anti-depressants to the development of organ transplants, bypass surgery and joint replacement. Diseases that used to kill millions every year — like polio, diphtheria, mumps, rubella and hepatitis — are now preventable, treatable or eradicated with immunizations, thanks to research on animals.

“I’m at an age where I know what this kind of research does,” said Peggy Smith, the assistant director of the Washington National Primate Research Center at the UW. “My son is alive because of this kind of research. Not everybody gets to know [first hand] how important it is, or it hits them at different times in their lives.”

Last year, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the primary federal agency for conducting and supporting medical research in the United States, provided the UW with $196 million for medical research.

However, concerns from animal activist groups last year prompted federal investigations into the primate center, which performs neurological research on adult macaque monkeys.

Three UW researchers were found to have violated federal animal protection regulations when they conducted at least 41 unauthorized surgeries on 14 monkeys.

“These unauthorized surgeries were experiments that [involved] implanting an electrode on their brain, hooking up wires to their eyes and installing different equipment on their brain,” said Alisse Cassell, a member of UW’s Campus Animal Rights Educators (CARE). “It’s very invasive, and I don’t think there’s any way that that could be considered humane in itself.”

Under the Animal Welfare Act (AWA), the University’s animal oversight group, the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC), must approve all of the UW’s animal experiments to ensure compliance with federal regulations.

“It’s not surgery in the classic sense,” Smith said. “It’s like if you have braces and suddenly a wire is broken and you have to go in and have them repaired by your dentist — some even go to that level — but they’re still categorized as surgeries.”

Dave Anderson, the director of the primate center, said the researchers had accidentally left out wording allowing for possible surgical repairs during their experiments in forms sent to the IACUC for review — procedures that had been approved in previous years — therefore making them unapproved.

“They went forward with these same types of activities that they had always been approved to do under the assumption that they continued under that approval to do it,” Anderson said. “It was an error that should have never happened.”

Debra Durham, the primate specialist for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), said the error should not be disregarded as minor or insignificant.

“It’s very disturbing to think that rules that protect animals and are supposed to limit the amount of pain and suffering they experience aren’t being followed closely,” Durham said.

The committee would have approved the surgeries had the researchers correctly outlined the procedures for review, said IACUC executive secretary Nona Phillips.

In 2006, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) cited a UW researcher for conducting unauthorized surgeries on three monkeys.

IACUC reported the violations as required, but the committee chose to close the case rather than investigate further.

“It isn’t normal to go re-do the USDA’s investigation,” Phillips said. “When the USDA comes, you accept their findings and then you act upon those findings, and that is what we did.”

In 2007, the NIH reopened the investigation,\ and during the inquiry, IACUC discovered that instead of one researcher and three monkeys subjected to unauthorized surgeries, there were 14 monkeys, three UW researchers and 41 surgeries.

The Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare (OLAW), the overseeing office within NIH, has closed the case, allowing the neurological studies to continue on the basis that although some surgeries were unapproved, the research itself was approved.

“[The issues] have all been resolved,” Smith said. “All three of those [researchers] are doing their research. If there were issues here, trust me, they wouldn’t still be doing their research.”

However, in response to the AWA violations, the NIH is requesting that the UW pay back some of the $9 million in federal grants it gave to the primate center. NIH has yet to determine how much money is to be repaid. Phillips said the NIH could request anywhere from $25,000 to $200,000 to cover the cost of the surgeries and veterinary care of the monkeys.

“Researchers that continually violate federal law … should be barred from receiving any federal funding for experimentation permanently,” said Michael Budkie, the executive director of Stop Animal Exploitation Now! (SAEN), a research watchdog organization. “If they can’t follow the regulations, they shouldn’t be allowed to use animals.”

Members of SAEN and PETA have asked the state government to institute an independent investigation of the case to determine if any state funds were used to commission the unauthorized surgeries.

“If the funds were used, we want the money to be returned,” Durham said. “It doesn’t make sense for the state to use taxpayers’ money in order to fund the violation of federal laws and regulations.”

Since the USDA investigation, the IACUC and the primate center have made changes to the approval process for animal experiments at the UW to make sure AWA violations never happen again.

“I hope the UW will be much more diligent at expressing concern as they find red flags that violations are occurring and animals are suffering,” Durham said.

Discussions between CARE and the primate center are ongoing concerning the release of an undetermined number of monkeys, after CARE began a petition in October of last year.

“Rather than having these animals uselessly euthanized, CARE … [requested] that these monkeys be released to the Animal Protection Institute, an animal sanctuary, as this is the best and most humane solution for the animals,” Cassell said.

The primate center has high standards when it comes to placing their animals in sanctuaries, Anderson said.

“We would require that the animals essentially receive as good of care as they do here, which includes a lot of things and includes a long-term commitment,” he said. “To date, we have … not been satisfied with the discussions we’ve had with them. So our discussions right now are still preliminary in nature.”

[Reach reporter Sara Bruestle at news@thedaily.washington.edu.]