Two research projects at Purdue University faced suspension due to serious allegations of misconduct, including the falsification of laboratory documents and failure to adhere to established protocols. The complaints, filed internally in late 2025, detailed numerous violations in animal research practices that raised ethical concerns.
Among the allegations were claims that researchers failed to maintain an aseptic environment, neglected to use appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE), and administered unapproved drugs to laboratory animals. The allegations were reported in letters to the National Institute of Health (NIH), disclosed by the animal rights organization Stop Animal Exploitation Now through a Freedom of Information Act request.
Details of Allegations and Responses
Michael Budkie, executive director of SAEN, emphasized the gravity of these allegations, stating, “They were not following protocol… and the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee requires that the protocol is followed to the letter.” He added that any research conducted under these conditions cannot be published, undermining the potential scientific contributions of these projects.
In October 2025, one experiment titled “Examination of behavioral and neural outcomes associated with drugs of abuse and neurodegenerative diseases” was suspended due to concerns regarding the improper use of PPE and failure to maintain proper lab conditions. Trevor Peters, a spokesperson for Purdue, confirmed the suspension but asserted that all procedures adhered to approved guidelines, stating, “The matter was resolved promptly, and the protocol was reinstated without further concerns.”
However, another experiment, “High-throughput deep tissue in vivo imaging,” faced a permanent suspension following a unanimous vote from the IACUC in December 2025. This action stemmed from serious violations, including improper housing of laboratory mice and failure to euthanize a wounded mouse despite veterinary instructions. The suspended lab member reportedly treated the animal with surgical glue, causing significant pain, without consulting a veterinarian.
Consequences and Investigations
The documents revealed that logs detailing animal health appeared to have been falsified, raising alarms about the integrity of the research process. Budkie noted that SAEN receives around 1,000 lab complaints annually, with 50 to 100 deemed serious enough for suspension, but fewer than ten involving falsified documents.
The letter to the NIH highlighted the potential impact of this misconduct on Purdue’s accreditation status with the Association for Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care. The university is under investigation for research misconduct as per its Ethics Policy III.A.2. Should the NIH find evidence of research misconduct, individuals involved could face severe repercussions, including a ban from federally funded research.
Budkie warned that even if individuals are dismissed from their positions, their career prospects in university research could remain jeopardized, particularly in an environment where many institutions rely on federal funding for a significant portion of their research.
Purdue has stated that remaining unsuspended staff will undergo retraining on IACUC policies to ensure compliance moving forward. Budkie expressed concern about the frequency of suspensions at Purdue, remarking, “For a comparatively smaller institution to have to suspend two protocols apparently within a year, that’s highly unusual.”
Peters reiterated Purdue’s commitment to ethical research practices, saying, “Purdue remains fully committed to maintaining complete compliance with all animal care and use regulations and to sustaining transparent, proactive communication with institutional oversight committees.”
The attending veterinarian involved in the case did not respond to requests for comment regarding the incidents. As investigations continue, the implications of these findings could resonate throughout the research community, highlighting the critical importance of adherence to ethical standards in scientific inquiry.
