We're excited NIH has acknowledged that a bias might exist.

Now it’s time to get to work understanding what it looks like, how it impacts funding rates for researchers using #NAMs and other nonanimal methods, and take steps toward mitigation.

We summarized our analysis of NIH-funded neuroscience research: study sections dominated by experts in animal-based research, correlating with fewer funded non-animal projects and underscoring the need for diverse expertise in review groups. doi.org/10.1101/2025...

#neuroskyence

In the letter, we highlighted our own initiatives aimed at understanding and addressing animal methods bias, including two surveys and a workshop report:

📝 doi.org/10.14573/alt...
💻 doi.org/10.1016/j.na...
🗣️ doi.org/10.1016/j.na...

In NIH’s April announcement, the agency described measures related to animal methods bias: “grant review staff will participate in mitigation training to address any possible bias towards animal studies and integrate experts on alternative methods into study sections.” www.nih.gov/news-events/...

Read the full UK Home Office policy paper here: www.gov.uk/government/p...

🔚

These steps can begin to foster a research ecosystem where methods are chosen for merit, not tradition.

On the whole, addressing animal methods bias will require continued collaboration among funders, journals, regulators, and researchers worldwide.

5/6

Key actions include:

⚖️ Editorial policies that incentivize the use of nonanimal methods without requiring the inclusion of additional animal experiments

🧑‍🏫 Reviewer guidance for fair evaluation of nonanimal methods

📊 Metrics to track animal vs. nonanimal studies

4/6

Animal methods bias = a preference for animal-based research or lack of expertise to evaluate nonanimal methods.

The new UK strategy may help change this as it commits to "[s]trengthen the commitment of journal editors to publishing research using alternative methods."

3/6

The strategy acknowledges barriers that have long slowed progress:

❌ Lack of support from peers, journals, regulators
❌ Poor awareness of nonanimal methods
❌ Institutional commitment to animal models

These issues are central to Animal Methods Bias.

2/6

➡️ If you're wondering how else you might prevent and address the impacts of animal methods bias, check out our resources at www.animalmethodsbias.org

Thanks to pilot grants & funding streams that support the #3Rs & animal-free research—including initiatives from @jhucaat.bsky.social & @afruk.bsky.social—she's built momentum for her lab.

Now in her 3rd year, she’s redefining lung models with rigorous, translatable, human-specific findings.

🗨️ “Non-animal approaches are still often undervalued or seen as 'risky' compared to traditional animal-based studies. Overcoming this is an ongoing process," Dr. Movia said.

For her, the process wasn’t fundamentally different to setting up an animal-based lab.

One key difference?

#AnimalMethodsBias put Dr. Movia at a distinct disadvantage in competitive funding environments.

There are a lot of hurdles to starting a new academic lab.

Finding a department that believes in you, building the right team, and securing funding are just a few.

#academiclife

We’ll be expanding on this and other recommendations as a part of an initiative to urge journals to take action to help address animal methods bias.

Stay tuned for more on that as it develops!

Among his suggested remedies, Ploegh offers that editors should have—or seek to have—appropriate expertise to evaluate reviewer experiments and intervene when necessary.

We agree and think this is one of the most important mitigation strategies for animal methods bias.

When reviewers suggest animal experiments, as in cases of #AnimalMethodsBias, it introduces ethical concerns.

Under pressure to publish, researchers may feel compelled to conduct animal studies without scientific or ethical justification—just to satisfy reviewer demands.

#PublishorPerish

Ploegh said these experiments are often expensive and unnecessary, slowing the pace of research to a crawl without any obvious advantage, and having particularly serious impacts on early career researchers.

Read his short perspective in @nature.com here: www.nature.com/articles/472...