A setback for science, but a large ethical step forward.<p>I am a bit unsettled by the idea that even non-invasive and neutral research will stop; this means that some of the work I did on SIV vaccine efficacy (for the purposes of learning in service of making an HIV vaccine) a few years ago might not get the ethical approval to be performed today even though we were using macaques instead of chimps.<p>I anticipate a chilling effect on primate studies in general after this policy change as the review boards attune to the new current of cash flow from the NIH. Monkey trials have always been exorbitantly expensive, and non-chimp studies will probably see cost rises in addition to reduced funding. In our trials, the monkeys were given harmless vaccinations, and had blood draws every once in a while, then retired to a sanctuary at the end of the study... not remotely unethical, but probably not consistent with the highest standards of animal rights that are coming into vogue.<p>A lot of these monkeys are very well cared for-- not loved, but definitely attended to. There are federal IACUC regulations on how many toys they are allowed to have, and how to rotate their selection of toys such that they only have access to their favorite toy&#x2F;food&#x2F;drink some of the time so that they don&#x27;t get hedonic desensitization. These monkeys even have privacy rights regarding their medical info in some niche cases.