House Oversight Subcommittee Probes Taxpayer-Funded Animal Experiments, Urges Investment in Human-based Alternatives

At a hearing of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform's Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Information Technology and Government Innovation, lawmakers and expert witnesses criticized federal funding of animal experiments and pushed for stronger oversight and greater investment in human-based research alternatives.

The discussion centered on a series of examples that witnesses described as wasteful or cruel, including past National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants that funded tests on dogs and other animals, an asserted portfolio of NIH grants described by one witness as connected to "transgender" animal models, and the use of taxpayer funds at foreign laboratories. Witnesses and members said federal investment in alternatives such as organs-on-a-chip, three-dimensional organoids and computational models could yield more human-relevant data while reducing animal use.

Justin Goodman, senior vice president for advocacy and public policy at the watchdog group White Coat Waste Project, told the panel that his organization's reviews of federal grant databases and contracts turned up what he described as "cruel, wasteful, inefficient, and dangerous" experiments funded with taxpayer dollars. Goodman testified that his group's searches identified roughly $240 million in NIH grants related to transgender animal experiments, with about $26 million described as active grants in the databases his group used. He also repeated reporting that former NIAID leadership oversaw experiments on beagles and other animals that his organization has sought to end.

Paul Locke, a professor in the Department of Environmental Health and Engineering at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, framed the issue in scientific terms. Locke said that many modern scientific questions require "human-centric" methods and listed technologies that can reduce reliance on animals: organs-on-a-chip and other microphysiological systems, three-dimensional organoids, and machine learning and computational models. He urged federal agencies to lead and fund validation and adoption of those methods so they can be used for regulatory and research decisions.

Elizabeth Baker, director of research policy at the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, recommended ending federal support for experiments that she characterized as wasteful and reinvesting savings into human-based approaches. Baker told the committee that, in her view, a large share of federal animal research produces results that do not translate to humans and said increased transparency about the number of animals used and federal spending is needed.

Members of the subcommittee spoke across party lines. Chairwoman Mace described the hearing as a nonpartisan oversight effort and said she planned to continue legislative work on the issue. Ranking Member Brown thanked witnesses and said she supports modernizing research methods while ensuring oversight. Several members referenced prior and proposed legislation: Chairwoman Mace noted a prior bill, the Preventing Animal Abuse and Waste Act, aimed at limiting certain NIH-funded tests on dogs and cats; witnesses and members also referenced the Humane Cosmetic Act, the FDA Modernization Act (earlier congressional reforms to testing requirements), and other proposed transparency measures.

Witnesses and lawmakers also raised national-security and foreign-aid concerns. Goodman described NIH-funded work at foreign laboratories and contracts he said involved sending animals or funding animal experiments abroad; he said that, in his view, continued funding to some foreign facilities raises oversight and national-security questions. Members asked witnesses about specific cases the witnesses had publicized, including investigations into USDA projects and previously publicized NIH-funded studies.

The hearing produced no formal votes. Members and witnesses agreed on the need for more transparency: proposals discussed included requiring recipients of federal research funds to report annual animal counts and making those records public, strengthening agency frameworks for validating alternatives, and repurposing funding toward non-animal methods. Several members said they planned to pursue or revive legislation and follow up with written questions to witnesses.

The subcommittee concluded without formal committee action; Chairwoman Mace closed the hearing and noted members would have five legislative days to submit additional materials and written questions for the record.