H.R.1291 - Humane and Existing Alternatives in Research and Testing Sciences Act of 2025; HEARTS Act of 2025 (119th Congress)
Summary
H.R.1291, the HEARTS Act of 2025, aims to amend the Public Health Service Act to prioritize non-animal methods in research funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). It seeks to establish a National Center for Alternatives to Animals in Research and Testing to promote and fund these alternative methods. The bill also mandates reporting on the number of animals used in federally funded research and testing.
Expected Effects
The HEARTS Act would likely lead to a reduction in the number of animals used in research and testing. This would be achieved by incentivizing the development and use of non-animal methods. The establishment of the National Center would provide resources and training to researchers, fostering innovation in alternative research methods.
Potential Benefits
- Reduced animal suffering in research and testing.
- Increased accuracy and relevance of research findings by utilizing human-relevant models.
- Promotion of innovation in biomedical research through the development of cutting-edge technologies.
- Improved transparency and public access to data regarding animal use in research.
- Potential cost savings associated with non-animal research methods.
Potential Disadvantages
- Potential initial costs associated with establishing the National Center and developing alternative research methods.
- Possible resistance from researchers accustomed to traditional animal testing methods.
- Challenges in validating and standardizing new non-animal research methods.
- Risk of hindering research progress if suitable non-animal alternatives are not readily available for all research areas.
- Potential for increased regulatory burden on research institutions.
Constitutional Alignment
While the Constitution does not explicitly address animal research, the bill aligns with the general welfare clause (Preamble) by promoting advancements in medical research and reducing potential harm to animals. Congress's power to regulate interstate commerce (Article I, Section 8) could be interpreted to extend to regulating research practices that impact public health and the economy. The bill does not appear to infringe upon any specific constitutional rights or limitations.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).