When the UK government committed to strengthening PhD training as part of its strategy to replace animals in science, it marked a crucial step forward. At Replacing Animal Research, we have long advocated that if we want to change the future of science, we have to include the scientists of the future. As the NC3Rs now works on drafting the training outline to deliver on these strategy commitments, we have been reflecting on what early-career researchers genuinely need from this education.

It is easy to assume that PhD training in this space simply means teaching students how to utilise non-animal methods or new approach methodologies in the lab. While technical skill in cell culture or organ-on-a-chip technology is essential, true replacement requires a far broader mindset shift, particularly for those working in biomedical fields where animal use is still highly entrenched.

What potential animal users need to know

For early-career researchers who may potentially use animals, training must address the root of how research is designed. Too often, replacement is treated as a tick-box exercise late in the planning process, a replacement paradox, where animal models are selected by default  and often funded before their use must be justified and consideration of replacements evidenced.

To break this cycle and truly embrace replacement, PhD students need to:

• Understand the legal reality:

  The 3Rs are not merely best practice guidelines; they are embedded in law. Animals should only ever be used as a last resort when no scientifically satisfactory non-animal alternative exists. Understanding the law and the responsibilities on researchers to implement and evidence replacement exploration is key.

• Appreciate the bigger picture:

  Students should be up to speed on the direction of travel across the globe towards replacing animal use and the philosophy of replacement beyond animal research regulation; understanding fully that replacement in biomedical research is a move away from all animal use to human-based technology and methods and understanding the ethical responsibilities on researchers and funders to avoid animal use and public and patient expectations particularly around the use of public funds.

• Challenge the status quo:

  Standard animal models are frequently accepted out of historical use rather than predictive accuracy for human biology. Students must be empowered to question whether an established model is genuinely the best tool for human health outcomes. Animal use can still be challenged where replacements do not exist, if it is a poor model for answering a research question – is it ethically justifiable to use those animals at all?

• Deconstruct research questions:

  Students must be taught how to break down a research question into the specific data outcomes required. Focusing on the biological mechanism and data output needed can help scientists identify whether alternative methodologies could be used.

• Implement effective searching skills:

  Finding non-animal alternatives requires knowing where and how to look. Students need practical training in systematic searching tools and methods and view replacement as an exciting scientific opportunity rather than a regulatory requirement.

Non-animal researchers also help to advance alternatives

Equally, training should not isolate those who are likely to work strictly with non-animal methods, such as in vitro or in silico modelling.

Early-career NAMs researchers need to understand the broader landscape of biomedical science and the role of animal research within this. When developing a cell-based or computational model, students should be encouraged to reflect on whether this model is a replacement tool and whether it could be used as such in other research areas. By understanding traditional in vivo protocols and regulatory requirements, NAMs specialists can support the design, validation, and advancement of replacement technologies and methods. These researchers can also help communicate this in scientific and political arenas to help update understanding the state of replacement opportunities in different fields.

In vitro techniques often require animal-derived products. Understanding the scientific and ethical impacts of these products and how to find alternatives is often not included in early career training. It is also crucial for advancing non-animal science that alternative science is robust and reported well. Students must have the tools and training to support this.

Replacement of animals often happens faster with collaboration and multi-disciplinary approaches to solve problems. There may be periods of time where questions require a mix of animal and non-animal approaches, but it undoubtedly will be done faster if everyone is on the same page.

Our Vision for the NC3Rs Training Outline

As we pull together our proposals to share with the NC3Rs, our goal is to ensure this new training framework is holistic. Equipping PhD students with both critical evaluation skills and technical awareness to create a generation of researchers who don’t just default to old models, but actively build a human-relevant, animal-free future for science.