NABR Criticizes IUCN's Decision on Long-Tailed Macaque's Status
On October 9, 2025, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) reaffirmed its decision to categorize the long-tailed macaque (Macaca fascicularis) as 'Endangered.' This ruling has sparked outrage from the National Association for Biomedical Research (NABR), which argues that the IUCN's classification is not supported by scientific evidence. NABR's discontent stems from a 2023 petition they submitted, which highlights perceived inaccuracies in the scientific reviews utilized by the IUCN for its status determinations.
NABR's concerns center around the work of Hansen et al., which forms the basis for IUCN's classification. The organization claims that these reviews fail to accurately represent existing scientific findings, raising questions about the credibility of the IUCN’s assessment. Notably, a separate petition by Dr. Hank Jenkins has accused the authors of the Hansen review of potential conflicts of interest that warrant further scrutiny.
Adding to the complexity, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had previously denied a petition from advocacy groups to classify the long-tailed macaque under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The Service found that the information presented did not convincingly demonstrate any credible impact on the species' populations, echoing NABR's stance that the current IUCN decision lacks substantiation. This contradictory situation—where no country recognizes the species as endangered—highlights the crux of NABR's argument. According to peer-reviewed studies, the latest IUCN determination is considered flawed and unbacked by substantial evidence.
Dr. Ray Hilborn, a noted scientist associated with NABR, expressed disappointment that the IUCN has seemingly disregarded the robust scientific data presented. He emphasized that the lack of reliable data on population trends and the misrepresentation of existing data pose significant challenges to the scientific integrity of the IUCN’s processes. Long-tailed macaques are highly valued in biomedical research due to their physiological and genetic similarities to humans. They have played integral roles in developing numerous prescription drugs, regenerative medicine techniques, immunology studies, and vaccine developments, including COVID-19 vaccine research.
NABR's president, Matthew R. Bailey, voiced disappointment over the IUCN's decision to yield to animal activist pressures rather than objectively assessing the scientific evidence available. He pointed out that while the IUCN classifies long-tailed macaques as endangered, it simultaneously acknowledges their invasive status in many regions. This contradiction further fuels the NABR's commitment to educating policymakers and the public on the importance of these animals for public health and scientific advancement.
In conclusion, the debate surrounding the long-tailed macaque's conservation status raises significant questions about scientific transparency and the influence of activism on conservation policies. NABR remains resolute in its mission to advocate for responsible animal research practices and ensure that scientific decisions are grounded in verifiable evidence. As the dialogue continues, the implications for both environmental policy and biomedical research remain profound.
For further details on the NABR petition and insights into their ongoing efforts, you can visit their official website at www.nabr.org.
NABR's concerns center around the work of Hansen et al., which forms the basis for IUCN's classification. The organization claims that these reviews fail to accurately represent existing scientific findings, raising questions about the credibility of the IUCN’s assessment. Notably, a separate petition by Dr. Hank Jenkins has accused the authors of the Hansen review of potential conflicts of interest that warrant further scrutiny.
Adding to the complexity, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had previously denied a petition from advocacy groups to classify the long-tailed macaque under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The Service found that the information presented did not convincingly demonstrate any credible impact on the species' populations, echoing NABR's stance that the current IUCN decision lacks substantiation. This contradictory situation—where no country recognizes the species as endangered—highlights the crux of NABR's argument. According to peer-reviewed studies, the latest IUCN determination is considered flawed and unbacked by substantial evidence.
Dr. Ray Hilborn, a noted scientist associated with NABR, expressed disappointment that the IUCN has seemingly disregarded the robust scientific data presented. He emphasized that the lack of reliable data on population trends and the misrepresentation of existing data pose significant challenges to the scientific integrity of the IUCN’s processes. Long-tailed macaques are highly valued in biomedical research due to their physiological and genetic similarities to humans. They have played integral roles in developing numerous prescription drugs, regenerative medicine techniques, immunology studies, and vaccine developments, including COVID-19 vaccine research.
NABR's president, Matthew R. Bailey, voiced disappointment over the IUCN's decision to yield to animal activist pressures rather than objectively assessing the scientific evidence available. He pointed out that while the IUCN classifies long-tailed macaques as endangered, it simultaneously acknowledges their invasive status in many regions. This contradiction further fuels the NABR's commitment to educating policymakers and the public on the importance of these animals for public health and scientific advancement.
In conclusion, the debate surrounding the long-tailed macaque's conservation status raises significant questions about scientific transparency and the influence of activism on conservation policies. NABR remains resolute in its mission to advocate for responsible animal research practices and ensure that scientific decisions are grounded in verifiable evidence. As the dialogue continues, the implications for both environmental policy and biomedical research remain profound.
For further details on the NABR petition and insights into their ongoing efforts, you can visit their official website at www.nabr.org.
Topics Policy & Public Interest）
【About Using Articles】
You can freely use the title and article content by linking to the page where the article is posted.
※ Images cannot be used.
【About Links】
Links are free to use.