Purdue Research Projects Halted Amid Allegations of Misconduct

Two research projects at Purdue University have been suspended following serious allegations of misconduct in animal research, which include failures to adhere to safety protocols and falsification of documentation. Internal complaints filed in late 2025 prompted an investigation that raised significant concerns regarding the treatment of laboratory animals and compliance with established guidelines.

The complaints, lodged with Purdue’s Office of Research, cited multiple instances of misconduct. Allegations included the failure to maintain an aseptic environment, inadequate personal protective equipment, the use of unapproved drugs on animals, and falsification of lab documents. The animal rights organization Stop Animal Exploitation Now provided letters to the National Institute of Health (NIH) detailing these claims, obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request.

According to Michael Budkie, executive director of Stop Animal Exploitation Now, the severity of the alleged misconduct is alarming. “They were not following protocol… and the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee requires that the protocol is followed to the letter,” Budkie stated, emphasizing that any research conducted under these compromised conditions cannot be published. He added, “Whatever chance these projects may have had to provide some kind of useful scientific information is gone.”

In October 2025, the project titled “Examination of behavioral and neural outcomes associated with drugs of abuse and neurodegenerative diseases” was temporarily suspended. This decision came after it was reported that lab members had failed to properly use personal protective equipment, maintain an aseptic lab environment, and employ correct suturing techniques, which are critical to prevent complications such as catheter dislodgement. Trevor Peters, a spokesperson for Purdue, confirmed the suspension but asserted that all procedures adhered to approved guidelines. “The matter was resolved promptly, and the protocol was reinstated without further concerns,” Peters noted in an email.

A second experiment, “High-throughput deep tissue in vivo imaging,” faced a more severe consequence. In December 2025, it was permanently suspended following a unanimous vote by the IACUC. Reports indicated that one lab member was indefinitely suspended for failing to humanely euthanize a mouse with a non-healing wound, contrary to instructions from a veterinarian. The individual reportedly treated the wound by moving the mouse from the animal housing area to the laboratory and applying surgical glue, which “likely caused significant pain.”

Allegations also surfaced regarding the improper housing of laboratory mice and the use of unauthorized over-the-counter drugs without veterinary consultation. Documentation related to this experiment revealed possible falsification of records, including discrepancies between logged access times and actual treatment times, raising further concerns about compliance and oversight.

According to Budkie, Stop Animal Exploitation Now receives approximately 1,000 complaints regarding laboratory practices annually, with 50 to 100 warranted for suspension, and fewer than 10 involving document falsification. The letter to the NIH highlighted that the university’s failure to address the falsification could jeopardize Purdue’s accreditation status with the Association for Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care.

The incident is now under investigation for research misconduct under Purdue’s Ethics Policy III.A.2. Individuals involved in the falsification of documents could face severe repercussions, including potential barring from federally funded research. Budkie emphasized the gravity of these implications, noting that the Federal Office of Research Integrity could impose lasting restrictions on those found guilty of research misconduct.

While the remaining unsuspended staff members will undergo retraining on IACUC policies, the chair of the IACUC did not respond to inquiries for comment. Budkie remarked, “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 practices, 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.” As the investigations continue, the implications of these alleged violations will likely resonate within the academic and research communities, highlighting the critical need for adherence to ethical standards in scientific research.