CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · History & Society

Animal testing at the University of Washington

practice at the University of Washington

Layered newspapers, civic records and oral-history reels arranged as chronological evidence
History and societyInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionOct 15, 2025
Entity authorityQ104844608 ↗
Source-derived summary

The University of Washington practices animal testing for a variety of purposes, including biomedical testing and paramedic training. Testing is performed by faculty from various departments across the university, and is conducted on animals including dogs, rabbits, primates, pigs, sheep, gerbils, bobcats, ferrets, and coyotes. Testing on primates is done through the Washington National Primate Research Center, which is located on campus. Animal testing at UW is overseen by the university's Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC).

Primate testing

Use of live pigs

Paramedic training

UW uses live pigs to train paramedics to perform a surgical airway procedure, in which a person's neck is cut into to create an emergency airway. This practice has received criticism from various individuals and organizations, including the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM), members of the Washington House of Representatives, UW students, and paramedic Cindy Coker. The PCRM reported that each year UW uses 20-40 pigs for this training, after which the pigs are euthanized. In January 2017, eight members of the Washington House of Representatives sent a letter to UW asking them to consider replacing the procedures on pigs with other methods.

Surgical training

In 2019, UW's medical school resumed using live pigs for surgical training after a five-year hiatus. This decision was criticized by the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine as well as UW professor Lisa Jones-Engel.

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “Animal testing at the University of Washington” as practice at the University of Washington. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Animal, testing and University.

Editorial reviewA useful synthesis for locating the documentary relationships between formal authority, participants and affected communities. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2017, 2019—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its value is orientation rather than verdict, with Animal, testing and University providing the first useful test.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Animal testing at the University of Washington”, the useful work is to connect “practice at the University of Washington” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.

Evidence profile

Contemporary correspondence, administrative files and participant testimony can test how later narratives organized the event or institution. The source revision retrieved here is dated Oct 15, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q104844608. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2017 and 2019.

Critical limits

Official terminology may obscure informal participation, dissent or communities documented only indirectly. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Compare institutional narratives with records created by participants and affected communities. Dates and formal titles are useful anchors, but not substitutes for context.

Best used for
  • Event chronology
  • Institutional context
  • Locating named record creators
Verify next

Contemporary correspondence, government or organizational records, oral histories and cited historical scholarship.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Animal testing at the University of Washington”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Animal testing at the University of Washington primary sources, Animal testing at the University of Washington archive and Animal research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Animal testing at the University of Washington”?
  2. Which voices are present, absent or mediated by the institution?
  3. What chronology connects this entry to wider political or social change?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Animal testing at the University of Washington” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.