ArticleEuropean journal for philosophy of science2026
Lane-Petter's Pipeline: Why reliably decreasing animal research takes more than replacements.
Article in European journal for philosophy of science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Programs for the "three Rs" of "replace, reduce, refine" (Russell & Burch 1959) aim to make science more compatible with animal protection. This article draws attention to a major obstacle to that endeavor: While some animal models are being replaced by alternatives, new animal models are also being developed. Animal research thus resembles a moving pipeline, not a fixed set of models, as British scientist and regulator William Lane-Petter noted over half a century ago (Lane-Petter 1961). This article provides an account of "Lane-Petter's Pipeline" (LPP) by drawing on philosophical literature on animal models and advances two claims: First, there is practically infinite room for the innovation of new animal models, so LPP can continue to move indefinitely unless policy intervenes; Second, the extent to which innovation focuses on new animal models rather than new non-animal-models plausibly depends on scientific repertoires (Ankeny & Leonelli, 2016) and the built environment of scientific work, which policy can help to shape. This highlights the potential, and the need, for strategic policies that tilt the environment of innovation towards new non-animal-models rather than new animal models.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.