The use of animals in research has raised concern among organisations that fight for animal rights. In the recent past, there has been an attempt to use alternative methods such as the Ames test which uses a bacterium. The attempt to replace rodents with such bacteria has not been completely successful (Festing & Wilkinson 2007). Animals still remain the best option for research and they have contributed a lot to science. Due to the irreplaceability of animals, researchers have to observe maximum reduction and refinement to ensure humane treatment of animals. Improvements of animal husbandly and housing are a few examples that can help achieve reduction and refinement (Festing & Wilkinson 2007). To assist researchers in understanding what constitutes humane treatment of animals, there is a code that has been put in place. For example, the Australian code of Practice for the care and use of animals for scientific purposes (the code) stipulates that an animal ethics committee (AEC), responsible for ensuring that animals are treated correctly, must be appointed by any institution that wishes to use animals for training or research (Rose et al. 2010). In this case the applicant is an institution and in accordance with the code. In addition, the applicant has appointed an AEC, in line with the Australian code of Practice for the care and use of animals for scientific purposes. The members of the AEC have however, not been listed and this is important as the code requires that they should have a certain representation. There are four categories that are required and these are a veterinarian, an active scientist, a person representing animal welfare and a community representative (Rose et al. 2010). The applicants have justified their animal of choice. In addition, they have chosen laboratory rats and mice as they are appropriate for the medical research training they are aiming to do. One of the most commonly used animals in research is mice which make up about 90% of all species used in medical experiments (Streba 2012). Moreover, the applicants also point out that the procedures they intend to follow are applicable and suitable for adult animals. The other alternative animals they could have chosen are the apes. However, the apes have higher cognitive capacities and carry more ethical responsibilities (Nuffield Council on Bioethics 2012). They also have higher maintenance costs and require special housing conditions and expert handling. The applicants’ housing conditions for the rats and mice are adequate. The rats are housed close to where the training will be taking place minimizing time spent in motion and making it easier for them to acclimatize. The animals have been provided with temperature controlled rodent rooms. In there the rodents are placed in boxes fitted with high top wire lids to enable them to see out of their boxes. They are also housed in fours to minimize social isolation. The manner and frequency in which the boxes will be cleaned has, however, not been mentioned and this is important in ensuring that the animals will be well treated (Nuffield Council on Bioethics 2012). A very dirty cage is not good for the animals’ wellbeing. At the same time, cleaning t