Listen to this article
Estimated 5 minutes
The audio version of this article is generated by AI-based technology. Mispronunciations can occur. We are working with our partners to continually review and improve the results.
The lead scientist at the centre of a controversial cardiac study performed on dogs is defending the importance of his work for the first time since his London, Ont. lab was shut down and Ontario’s premier threatened to ban canines in research.
Frank Prato gave an exclusive interview to CBC London after learning two separate animal ethics committees had cleared him of all animal abuse allegations.
In August, an article by the Investigative Journalism Bureau and Postmedia, revealed that scientists from Lawson Research Institute were secretly inducing three-hour heart attacks in dogs and puppies before euthanizing them and removing their hearts for further study.
The research, conducted at St. Joseph’s Hospital in London, was kept under wraps with the animals allegedly wheeled into the hospital in blanket-covered crates, as loud music played to drown out their barking, according to the article that cited whistleblowers.
St. Joseph’s halted Prato’s research following public outcry, including from Ontario’s Premier Doug Ford, who vowed to “hunt down” scientists experimenting on animals. His government also proposed legislation to would prohibit “invasive medical research” on cats and dogs.
Prato refutes that his work was done in secret, noting that he began using dogs to look at what happens after a heart attack in 1982 at the hospital. He suggests the whistleblowers did not understand animal behaviour, especially post surgery.
“The dogs are fully anesthetized. Unlike a human, who will suffer great pain during a heart attack, dogs don’t suffer at all. The dog model showed great promise in understanding diseases like heart attack, what happens after it and how one recovers. This work is saving many, many lives.”
Animal model ‘appropriate’, investigation finds
An independent review by Western University’s Animal Care Committee (ACC) in September, and the Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC) in October, found the allegations of wrongdoing by Prato’s lab were unsubstantiated, according to a memo obtained by CBC News.
Both investigations included site visits, records reviews and in-depth interviews with those directly involved in the program. They found that the study did not induce heart failure and the dogs were free of pain during the procedure.
“After careful assessment of the evidence, on balance we report that the research program was fully in line with its approved AUPs (Animal Use Protocol) and followed all regulatory requirements,” wrote Arthur Brown, chair of Western University’s ACC.
“The animal model was appropriate and the research program had made significant contributions world-wide to the clinical management of myocardial infarction patients.”
Following surgery, the university review found that the dogs were actively monitored by a clinical veterinarian at least four times a day to start, and then twice a day as recovery progressed. Brown noted that the animals were with other dogs 24/7, and animal care staff interacted with them several times a day to provide them with socialization activities.
The dogs were well cared for, with appropriate bedding, toys and nutrition, the review found.
I was just destroyed and upset that here was the end of something that would save so many lives– Frank Prato, scientist
CBC News reached out to Brown for comment, who directed inquires to Western. A spokesperson confirmed the review took place but offered no further comment.
St. Joseph’s Health Care London also commissioned an external review after it ended the research, and a hospital spokesperson said those findings will be available in the coming weeks.
Why dogs?
Prato said he is now speaking out because he believes that stopping this type of research will prevent advancements in treating and curing heart disease.
“We were in the middle of finding new treatments for heart failure, and there are 750,000 patients with heart failure in this country,” he said. “I was just destroyed and upset that here was the end of something that would save so many lives.”
Prato explained that dogs were initially used for cardiac research in the 80s due to limitations on MRI equipment. He said dogs have a closer resemblance to human hearts compared to other animals like pigs, mice or rats.
Although most of the blood in the human body is delivered by one coronary artery, a secondary artery is responsible for about 20 per cent of blood flow, said Prato. Heart attacks often take about two hours to develop in both humans and dogs, making their cardiovascular systems “basically identical,” he added.
“It is this architecture of the blood vessels which make the dog the only model to properly study this technology,” Prato said, adding that the canines were not puppies and were full-sized laboratory bred dogs.
Prato’s team would reduce blood flow to a region of a dog’s heart, mimicking what would happen during a regular heart attack. They later released the obstruction and restored the blood flow.
Prato said the fallout has affected his career and personal life, but he’s more concerned about the impact this will have on cardiac patients.
“I understand dogs have come about as part of our society’s companions, and they provide tremendous emotional support to people. Where it gets ugly for me is the fact that now, we’re talking about one dog life being worth more than a million patients.”
