The focal researcher involved in a contentious cardiac trial conducted on canines is now advocating for the significance of his research, marking his first public defense since his laboratory in London, Ontario was closed and the Premier of Ontario threatened to prohibit the use of dogs in experiments. Frank Prato granted an exclusive interview to CBC London subsequent to the dismissal of all animal cruelty accusations by two distinct animal ethics panels.
In August, an investigation by the Investigative Journalism Bureau and Postmedia disclosed that scientists at the Lawson Research Institute were covertly inducing three-hour heart attacks in dogs and puppies before euthanizing them for further examination. The research, carried out at St. Joseph’s Hospital in London, was shrouded in secrecy, with the animals reportedly transported in covered crates while loud music masked their sounds. Following public backlash, including criticism from Premier Doug Ford, St. Joseph’s terminated Prato’s research and proposed legislation to prohibit invasive medical trials on cats and dogs.
Prato rebuts the notion that his research was clandestine, emphasizing that he initiated dog studies in 1982 to explore post-heart attack effects. He contends that the dogs, under anesthesia, do not experience pain during heart attacks, unlike humans, and asserts that this research has been instrumental in understanding heart diseases and aiding recovery, ultimately leading to numerous saved lives.
An independent investigation by Western University’s Animal Care Committee (ACC) in September and the Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC) in October concluded that the accusations against Prato’s lab were unfounded. Both reviews involved on-site inspections, record assessments, and thorough interviews with program participants. The investigations found that the study did not induce heart failure, and the dogs did not endure pain during the procedure.
Prato defended the appropriateness of the animal model used in his research, highlighting its global contributions to myocardial infarction patient care. The dogs received meticulous post-surgery care, with constant monitoring by a clinical veterinarian and regular socialization activities. They were provided with comfortable bedding, toys, and proper nutrition.
Prato expressed his disappointment over the halt in research, emphasizing the potential advancements in heart disease treatment that could be missed. He explained that dogs were chosen for their anatomical similarity to human hearts compared to other animals and their cardiovascular system resemblance to humans. Despite the personal and professional repercussions he has faced, Prato remains focused on the broader implications for cardiac patients.
The fallout from the controversy has significantly impacted Prato’s life, but his primary concern remains the potential setback in cardiac patient care due to the discontinuation of vital research.
[Source](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/scientist-using-dogs-in-controversial-study-explains-for-the-first-time-what-was-going-on-9.7071014)
