Thanks for clarifying @marvizon. Those are indeed different questions.
I’m looking at these guidelines more as “how can I do better science, with outcomes that are more reproducible and ultimately more accurate?” Those are my motivations and these recommendations all look sensible. Whether they are a Trojan horse to make doing animal research impractical, I do not know, but I defer to your experience. I don’t doubt that there are ulterior motives for this and just about anything that looks good on the surface.
But if scientists look at guidelines like these and voluntarily apply to their work, I have no issue with that and think that is ultimately wise and good for our field. For example, the Experimental Design tool that NC3R made is really useful and would certainly improve the design of our experiments before wasting time/effort on poorly designed studies:
Do I not use such a tool because of its origin?