USDA Reviews Complaint About Two Research Pigs’ Deaths at UMass Chan

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has acknowledged reviewing concerns about two pigs that died following cardiac experiments at UMass Chan Medical School in Worcester, Massachusetts. The acknowledgment follows an October 19, 2026, complaint from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, or PETA.

In correspondence dated October 21, USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service assigned separate tracking numbers to concerns involving the university and an animal supplier. The agency requested 30 to 60 days to examine the matters. That acknowledgment establishes a review of concerns, not a finding of violations or confirmation of a formal enforcement investigation.

The deaths described in the complaint occurred in December 2023 and January 2025. The new development is PETA’s submission of records and requests for regulatory scrutiny, rather than newly reported deaths occurring this month.

PETA questions whether the animals received adequate postoperative monitoring and timely veterinary attention. Its complaint also asks whether the university’s Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee adequately evaluated safeguards and criteria for intervening when animals’ conditions deteriorated.

The complaint acknowledges uncertainties in the records. For one pig, it says whether a veterinarian assessed postoperative symptoms is unclear. For the other, it describes a provisional explanation involving a displaced pacemaker lead and asks regulators to examine surgical checks and monitoring. These are questions for investigation, not established conclusions about preventable deaths.

A separate concern involves Earle M. Parsons & Sons Inc., identified as supplying three pigs to the university in December 2024. PETA asks USDA to determine whether the supplier held an appropriate license, operated under another name or qualified for an exemption. Absence from a database search alone does not establish an unlawful sale.

The Worcester Guardian reported that UMass Chan had previously affirmed its commitment to regulatory compliance and responsible animal care. Those statements preceded this complaint. Its October 21 report said neither the university nor the supplier had answered its latest inquiries.

Why This Matters for Animals

The complaint concerns concrete safeguards for animals used in research: veterinary access, monitoring after procedures and institutional oversight. The agency’s response creates a documented avenue for examining those concerns.

Whether care failures occurred, contributed to either death or warrant enforcement remains unresolved. The complaint and acknowledgment should not be presented as a completed regulatory finding.

Source: The Worcester Guardian — UMass Chan complaint and USDA acknowledgment