AMP calls for stronger safeguards around public disclosure and continued exemptions for routine, low-risk animal research activities.

Washington, D.C. — October 19, 2026 — Americans for Medical Progress (AMP) submitted comments in response to a National Institutes of Health (NIH) Request for Information on its proposed Biosafety Policy for Research Involving Biohazards.

While AMP supports NIH’s efforts to modernize biosafety oversight, its response emphasizes the importance of ensuring that updated requirements do not inadvertently create additional security risks for research personnel or impose unnecessary oversight on routine animal activities that pose no meaningful biosafety risk.

AMP’s response outlines three key recommendations:

1. Strengthen protections for research personnel and facilities. Reconsider public disclosure requirements that could expose sensitive information about animal research activities, particularly when compiling otherwise publicly available information creates new security risks.
2. Establish risk-based thresholds for incident reporting and public disclosure. Distinguish genuine biosafety concerns from routine animal-related incidents, such as minor bites, scratches, or escapes that involve no exposure to or release of biological agents.
3. Preserve existing exemptions for low-risk animal research activities. Ensure that routine activities, including the breeding, purchase, and transfer of low-risk transgenic rodents, remain exempt from new approval requirements when they pose no meaningful biosafety risk.

Of particular concern are the proposed public disclosure requirements and their implications for research personnel who already face harassment, threats, and other security incidents.

AMP encourages NIH to ensure that the final policy supports meaningful transparency and accountability while protecting research personnel and keeping oversight proportionate to actual biosafety risks.

Read AMP’s full coments here.

AMP calls for greater transparency, balanced scientific expertise, and safeguards against methodological bias as NIH considers changes to its peer review process.

Washington, D.C. — October 13  — This week, Americans for Medical Progress (AMP) submitted comments in response to a National Institutes of Health (NIH) Request for Information proposing to replace final overall impact scores and percentiles with broader competitiveness categories.

As NIH places greater emphasis on New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) in its funding and peer review processes, AMP’s response outlines three recommendations:

1. Adopt more nuanced reporting categories to provide applicants with meaningful information about their competitiveness.
2. Increase transparency around NIH’s recruitment of “human-based” science experts to serve as grant reviewers.
3. Solicit formal public comment on the recruitment initiative to ensure scientific societies, institutions, and investigators have an opportunity to provide input.

Regarding Recommendations 2 and 3, AMP used this comment opportunity to raise concerns about NIH’s recently announced effort to recruit “human-based” science experts for its study sections. Specifically, AMP requested clarity on the following:

• Recruitment and qualifications: How reviewers will be recruited, screened, and selected.
• Balanced scientific expertise: How NIH will maintain appropriate expertise across animal models, NAMs, and complementary research approaches.
• Methodological bias: How NIH defines and evaluates perceived “animal methods bias” and will safeguard against introducing new biases.
• Reviewer training: Whether training on methodological bias will be developed and made publicly available.

Read AMP’s comments here.

AMP emphasizes the continued importance of animal studies and calls for greater attention to rigor, reproducibility, and scientifically appropriate model selection and sharing.

Washington, D.C. — August 19  — Americans for Medical Progress (AMP) submitted comments in response to NIH’s Request for Information on Measuring and Rewarding Scientific Impact (NOT-OD-26-087), focusing specifically on considerations relevant to animal research.

For the topic “Rigor and Reproducibility,” AMP recommended greater recognition of the intrinsic and extrinsic variables that can influence research outcomes, including factors related to animal care, housing, handling, environment, and veterinary oversight, and encouraged NIH to consider how these variables are identified, managed, and reported. Regarding “Data, Software, and Model Sharing,” AMP recommended broadening the proposed category to place greater emphasis on model selection, characterization, validation, and scientific appropriateness before incentivizing wider dissemination.

Together, these recommendations would help ensure that research models are evaluated thoughtfully based on the scientific question, their demonstrated strengths and limitations, and their fitness for purpose while preserving the flexibility to use animal models, NAMs, or complementary approaches as appropriate.

Read AMP’s comments here.

To affirm the critical role that all scientific tools play in advancing biomedical progress, AMP has published a new statement supporting both New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) and responsibly conducted animal research. While emerging technologies and human-based methods are strengthening research and advancing the 3Rs, they cannot yet replicate every interaction within a living system or provide all the evidence needed to evaluate safety and effectiveness. AMP calls for sustained investment and collaboration across the research continuum, enabling scientists and veterinarians to use the approaches best suited to the question at hand and continue advancing human and animal health.

Read the statement here.

Washington, D.C. — July 24  — Americans for Medical Progress (AMP) submitted written comments ahead of the Interagency Coordinating Committee for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM) Public Forum, taking place July 29-30, 2026.

AMP’s comments focus on NIH’s newly established Office of Research Innovation, Validation, and Application (ORIVA) and how ICCVAM can help facilitate the office’s mission and growing role within the agency. The comments underscore that scientific progress will require continued support for both animal studies and New Approach Methodologies (NAMs), with federal policies, funding decisions, and research priorities reflecting an integrative approach rather than creating an unnecessary divide between scientific methods.

AMP offered three recommendations:

1. Measure progress by scientific impact. Success should be evaluated through rigor, reproducibility, predictive value, regulatory utility, mechanistic insight, and patient benefit rather than changes in funding totals or animal-use numbers.
2. Protect and strategically invest in essential research infrastructure. Investments in NAMs and its infrastructure should complement, rather than undermine, the facilities, breeding resources, veterinary expertise, skilled personnel, samples, and reference data needed across the research ecosystem.
3. Maintain method-neutral grant review, training, and agency communication. Research approaches should be evaluated according to their suitability for the scientific question and the quality of the evidence they can produce, without preferences or disincentives based solely on the category of method proposed.

Read AMP’s full comments here.

Proposed OMB Changes Raise Serious Risks for Research Animal Care and Scientific Progress

Washington, D.C. — July 13  — Americans for Medical Progress has submitted formal comments opposing several provisions in the Office of Management and Budget’s proposed revisions to the Uniform Guidance governing federal financial assistance (Docket No. OMB-2026-0034).

In addition to how this proposal would devastate U.S. biomedical research, AMP’s comments focus on the serious consequences for research involving animals. Abrupt funding disruptions could force studies to end prematurely, result in preventable loss of animal life, and waste years of scientific work and taxpayer investment.

AMP’s comments address three primary issues:

1. Weakening expert peer review. Scientific decisions involving experimental design, model selection, feasibility, and animal welfare require specialized expertise. AMP opposes provisions that would reduce peer review to an advisory role while giving political appointees broad discretion to override expert evaluations.
2. Expanding grant suspension and termination authority. Ending an animal study abruptly unnecessarily endangers animals’ lives, leads to premature euthanasia, and undermines the scientific value of the ongoing work. AMP urges OMB to remove this provision, or at a minimum, require safeguards that protect animal care and allow studies to close out responsibly before funding is withdrawn.
3. Restricting science communication. The proposed limitations on communications support will make it harder for researchers and institutions to explain federally funded work to journalists, policymakers, patients, and the public. This is especially troubling in animal research, where clear and accurate communication is essential for explaining scientific necessity, oversight, animal care, and public health relevance.

AMP believes these provisions would undermine animal welfare, scientific integrity, transparency, and the preclinical research infrastructure needed to sustain American leadership in medicine. AMP is urging OMB to withdraw or substantially revise the proposal.

Read AMP’s full comments here

Washington, D.C. — May 27— AMP joined twenty-three scientific, veterinary, and biomedical research organizations, institutions and others to sign onto a letter led by the National Primate Research Centers (NPRCs) to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The letter expressed serious concerns about the agency’s plan to retire approximately 160 macaques to the Born Free USA Primate Sanctuary. It warns that rapidly introducing large numbers of unfamiliar adult macaques into new social groups could create significant welfare risks, including aggression, injury, and chronic stress. Signatories also questioned the transparency of the selection process and urged the CDC to fully evaluate alternative retirement options and establish independent expert oversight to ensure the monkeys’ long-term welfare and safety.

Read the letter here.

Washington, D.C. — May 26 — Americans for Medical Progress (AMP) submitted formal comments to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in response to its Request for Information (RFI) soliciting comments regarding a framework for the NIH-Wide Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2027-2031.

In our response, AMP emphasized the importance of maintaining a balanced and evidence-based biomedical research framework that supports both animal studies and New Approach Methodologies (NAMs).

We highlighted how animal models remain essential for understanding complex biological systems, advancing treatments for diseases such as cancer and neurodegenerative disorders, and ensuring the safety and effectiveness of new therapies. AMP also encouraged NIH to continue investing in interdisciplinary research infrastructure, workforce development, and collaborative approaches that integrate emerging technologies like AI and NAMs alongside animal research.

Read AMP’s RFI response here.

Washington, D.C. — May 8. Americans for Medical Progress (AMP) issued a statement related to the purchase of 1500 dogs from Ridglan Farms by Big Dog Ranch Rescue and the Center for a Humane Economy.

Social media pages and news feeds are filled with videos and photos of happy, healthy dogs being transferred from the research dog breeding facility to shelters around the country. This offers the opportunity to reflect on the contribution of dogs to medical progress and to recognize the compassionate care provided for dogs and other animals needed for research.

Below is the statement:

Research involving dogs has played an important role in advancing both human and veterinary medicine, contributing to treatments and therapies that improve and save lives, including the lives of pets. From vaccines and surgical techniques to treatments for heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and other serious conditions, many medical advances relied on carefully conducted research involving animals alongside non-animal methods and human volunteers.

The dogs adopted from research programs, including those recently released from Ridglan Farms, are healthy, social, and loving animals because of the dedicated care they received from veterinarians, animal care professionals, and staff throughout their lives. The successful transition of research dogs into homes reflects the strong standards of care and commitment to animal well-being that exist within responsible research and breeding programs.

Everyone loves dogs and wants what is best for them. Whether someone works in research or not, we all share the same hopes: healthy lives for our families, effective treatments for our pets, and medical progress when illness strikes. At the same time, society depends on continued scientific advancement to develop new cures, vaccines, and therapies for both people and animals.

Today, achieving those breakthroughs still requires a combination of approaches, including animal research, non-animal technologies, and studies involving human volunteers. While the scientific community continues working to accelerate the development of alternative methods, it is important to do so realistically and responsibly. Until science reaches a point where animals are no longer needed in some areas of research, we must continue to honor and care for the animals that contribute to this essential work with compassion, respect, and the highest standards of welfare.

Download a PDF of the statement here.

Washington, D.C. — April 21. Americans for Medical Progress (AMP) issued a statement responding to the FDA’s “Year 1” roadmap update on reducing animal testing in drug development. The statement highlights concerns about inconsistencies between the agency’s public messaging and its own scientific guidance and review practices.

AMP emphasizes that, “For FDA’s roadmap to succeed, its implementation must be as honest as its aspirations are ambitious.” Ensuring alignment between public messaging and scientific reality is essential to maintaining trust, protecting patient safety, and clearly communicating the continued importance of animal research in drug development.

View AMP’s statement here.