Germany’s reliance on animal experimentation has reached a new low, with the annual statistics released by the German Institute for Animal Welfare (Bf3R) revealing a significant drop in usage. For the first time, the number of animals used in scientific and research endeavors has dipped below two million, totaling 1.95 million in 2024 – an 8.2% decrease from the previous year. This represents a particularly marked reduction in the use of vertebrates and cephalopods, down 9% to 1.33 million.
While the persistent prevalence of rodents, particularly mice (accounting for 72% of total usage), highlights the inherent challenges of transitioning away from established methodologies, the statistics also offer a complicated picture of progress and continuing ethical concerns. Rats comprised roughly 6%, while fish, rabbits and birds collectively accounted for a smaller proportion. The majority of procedures (63%) were classified as having a minor severity level, although 28.4% involved moderate and 3.6% severe impact – figures considered relatively low when compared to averages across the European Union, yet prompting renewed scrutiny.
Federal Commissioner for Animal Welfare, Silvia Breher of the CDU, acknowledged the apparent shift towards alternative methods and responsible animal handling, framing it as a positive step amidst ongoing public debate about ethical research practices. However, her commendation was tempered by a cautionary tone, underscoring the substantial number of animals still involved in experimentation. “These figures demonstrate the increasing importance of alternative methods” Breher stated, “but simultaneously, they highlight the need to further reduce animal usage.
This latest data arrives at a politically charged moment, as the German government faces growing pressure from animal rights groups advocating for stricter regulations and accelerated investment in non-animal research technologies. Critics argue that even with the decline in numbers, the scale of animal experimentation within Germany remains unacceptable and that the comparatively ‘low’ severity ratings, while suggesting improvements, can be subjective and lack robust, transparent evaluation metrics. The latest figures will undoubtedly fuel renewed calls for greater accountability and a more aggressive timeline for phasing out animal experimentation entirely, putting increased strain on researchers and policymakers alike to reconcile the demands of scientific advancement with fundamental ethical considerations.