In late 2025, two internal complaints at Purdue University led to the suspension of research projects due to allegations of misconduct involving animal research. The complaints, reported to the National Institute of Health (NIH), cited serious violations including failure to maintain an aseptic environment, inadequate personal protective equipment, unauthorized drug use on lab animals, and falsified laboratory documents.
Animal rights organization Stop Animal Exploitation Now (SAEN) obtained letters detailing these allegations through a Freedom of Information Act request. Executive Director Michael Budkie expressed concern over the severity of the incidents, stating, “They were not following protocol… and the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) requires that the protocol is followed to the letter.” He emphasized that the integrity of the research was compromised, stating, “Whatever chance these projects may have had to provide some kind of useful scientific information is gone.”
The first incident involved an experiment titled “Examination of behavioral and neural outcomes associated with drugs of abuse and neurodegenerative diseases.” This project was suspended in October 2025 and later reinstated. According to correspondence from the Office of Research to the NIH, the suspension was attributed to improper use of personal protective equipment, failure to maintain a sterile lab environment, and inadequate suturing techniques.
Confirming the suspension, university spokesperson Trevor Peters stated that the matter was resolved promptly, asserting that “no procedures were conducted outside of approved guidelines.” Nevertheless, the reinstatement of this protocol did not prevent further issues. In December 2025, another experiment, “High-throughput deep tissue in vivo imaging,” was permanently halted following a unanimous IACUC vote.
The second suspension stemmed from allegations of improper housing of laboratory mice, failure to euthanize an injured mouse despite veterinary instructions, and the use of unauthorized drugs without veterinary consultation. The involved lab member reportedly applied surgical glue to a wound on the mouse, which the documents suggest “likely caused significant pain.”
The IACUC’s investigation raised further concerns about the integrity of health logs for the animals, suggesting they may have been falsified. The documents contained discrepancies between recorded access times and actual events, leading to questions about the treatment of the animals involved.
Budkie noted that SAEN receives roughly 1,000 lab complaints annually, with only 50-100 meriting serious action, and fewer than 10 typically involving falsified documents. The misconduct allegations are serious enough that failure to address them could jeopardize Purdue’s accreditation from the Association for Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care.
Consequences for those found guilty of research misconduct could be severe, potentially barring them from federally funded research. Budkie elaborated, “The Federal Office of Research Integrity (at NIH), if they find someone guilty of research misconduct, they can bar (guilty parties) from ever participating in federally-funded research again.” This could have lasting implications, particularly as many institutions rely on federal funding for a significant portion of their research.
While the remaining staff members involved in the experiments will undergo retraining on IACUC policies, the chair of the IACUC did not respond to requests for comment. Budkie commented on the unusual nature of suspending two protocols within such a short timeframe, noting, “For a comparatively smaller institution to have to suspend two protocols apparently within a year, that’s highly unusual.”
Peters reaffirmed Purdue’s commitment to responsible research, stating, “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 university’s actions in addressing these serious allegations will be closely monitored by both the academic community and the public.
