Search

Loadshedding is a deliberate and temporary interruption of electricity supply intended to reduce the demand for electricity during periods of high demand. While loadshedding affects various sectors of the economy, its impact on Research Animal Facilities (RAF) is particularly concerning and this has not been systematically reviewed. We discuss the implications of loadshedding on Animal Health and Welfare, the quality of experimental data and compliance with RAF regulatory requirements. RAF are designed for the housing laboratory animals that are being used in research that benefits humans, animals and the environment. Scientific data emanating from these facilities needs to be credible and the housing environment should be maintained constantly. Laboratory animals may experience stress when there is disruption to the environmental conditions caused by electricity supply interruptions to the equipment used to maintain a stable and constant facility environment. Constant environmental parameters are essential for maintaining a comfortable working environment for personnel working in the facility as well. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Laboratory Animals is the property of Sage Publications, Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Policies and guidelines are available for acute disasters such as earthquakes, fire and floods, however, little is available on how laboratory animal facilities should mitigate subacute disasters like the COVID-19 pandemic that imposed major restrictions on the free movement of people. As such, laboratory animal facilities had to find plausible mitigating measures to safeguard the welfare of animals in their care, to prevent animal suffering if staff could not reach the animals, albeit with limited time. The simplest approach was to stop active experiments and halt animal breeding, or to euthanize all animals. Challenges with such methods included the ethical debate regarding euthanasia of animals at the start of a pandemic and the need to perform a harm–benefit analysis while drafting the disaster plans, termination of studies at advanced stages with information loss or killing of genetically modified strains that would be difficult to replace. Two research animal facilities in South Africa addressed these challenges by implementing several changes such as allowing only essential studies to continue, maintaining small breeding colonies for essential strains, and providing staff with private transport for travelling to and from work to avoid public transport and risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2. Engineering changes included redesigning working areas to cater for social distancing. The mitigating measures put in place by the two laboratory animal facilities were successful in ensuring the continued welfare of animals during the COVID-19 lockdown restrictions. These measures can be adopted in future pandemics that lead to restricted movement of staff. Plans de gestion en cas de catastrophes telles que le COVID-19 pour deux installations d'animaux de laboratoire en Afrique du Sud [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]