An EARA Conference satellite event at Berlin Science Week, co-organised by communications organisation Tierversuche verstehen (TVV), Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Max Delbrück Center and EARA, titled “Turning point in health research – Responsibility and communication in dealing with animal research”, featured a panel discussion on the future of biomedical research in Germany. 

The event was moderated by Roman Stilling, from TVV and an EARA board member, and included Adrian Grasse, a member of the German federal parliament; Anna Löwa, researcher at Charité; Stefan Treue, Director of the German Primate Center; Klaus Kronewitz, a patient advocate; and Julia Koch, journalist at Der SPIEGEL. 

Adrian Grasse highlighted progress in technologies that allow the replacement of animals but warned against neglecting reduction and refinement. He emphasised the need for an animal research law to harmonise practices across German states, raising the concern that current bureaucratic burdens in Germany could motivate researchers to leave the country. 

Anna Löwa, who works exclusively with non-animal methods, praised the growing focus on transparency and animal welfare and highlighted developments in human-cell models, cautioning that, “it’s vital to be clear on what these models can and cannot do”, since media hype around breakthroughs can mislead the public. Stefan Treue also noted how the scientific community, spurred by the COVID-19 crisis and a growing presence of science-skeptical discourse in public and political debates, now sees communication as essential. Still, he stressed that many institutions remain hesitant to speak out and researchers are often too stretched to engage publicly. While authenticity lies with those doing the research, the responsibility of public engagement should not lie solely on them. Klaus Kronewitz urged for deeper patient involvement in research design, as patients “understand best what they need and what they don’t,” while Julia Koch shared examples of successful public engagement, including research using non-human primates. Agreeing with other interventions, she argued: “If you question the necessity of animal studies, you must also critically evaluate the capabilities of the alternatives.”