The next plenary meeting of IVTIP will be held on:
November 10-11, 2004, Cambridge, UK
The meeting will be hosted by Huntingdon Life Sciences.
Central themes will be 'reduction' and hepatotoxicity.
Please contact the secretariat for the agenda of the meeting and possibilities for late registration.
The Industry Committee in Parliament has hit out at a study presented by consultancy firm Arthur D. Little which assessed the impact of REACH on the EU chemicals industry. The study predicted that REACH would generate a "2.9% loss in GDP and a 24.7% loss in production" over a 20 year period. The figures were heavily criticised by MEPs for being biased, based on uncertain assumptions and stemming from unverified early German and French studies.
Meanwhile, the environment committee has been confirmed as the lead parliamentary committee in charge of REACH; other Committees involved will be the industry committee and the internal market Committee.
Reacting to the study by Arthur D. Little, WWF's Julian Scola said "MEPs are getting fed up with exaggerated claims about the impact of REACH. Parliamentarians need to be given sound facts. Industry concerns have to be taken into consideration but based on facts and not complete exaggeration.
As to the political process, Scola says that there is "every indication" that the Dutch want to make progress. "If the industry committee debates it properly and takes a smart view of it, then things could move forward nicely. The problem is when industry makes grossly exaggerated claims about the impact of REACH and when industry ministers are fooled by that. But clearly the MEPs have shown that they're not willing to be fooled by it and I hope the ministers aren't either. There has to be a proper debate about costs, but let's have it based on proper calculations".
Ms Oganpera from the European Chemicals Industry Council (CEFIC) said she didn't feel that industry is losing support. "I am very confident that there is still support for our stand on REACH but I can understand that [MEPs] are getting fed up with all these different studies".
As for the political timeline, she stated: "It is really important that the matter is given whatever time it takes as long as we get a good system in the end. It depends now on the discussions in the Parliament. The ball is now in their court. I wouldn't be suprised if the vote in Council takes place towards the end of 2005". Speaking on 31 August at the European Policy Centre (EPC), the Dutch Minister for economic affairs Laurens Jan Brinkhorst reiterated that REACH was one of the priorities of the Dutch Presidency to revive the Lisbon Agenda
Source: Euractiv, September 9, 2004
US researchers from Boston's Tufts University have released a new study - " The true costs of REACH " - that will add fuel to the controversy over the costs and benefits of REACH.
Published on 13 October by the Nordic Council of Ministers, the study says the total direct costs of REACH to Europe's chemicals industry would not exceed 4 billion euros over 11 years, or an annual cost of "around 0.06% of the industry's sales revenues". In its current, less ambitious version, the academics estimate the direct costs of REACH at 3.5 billion euros.
Bringing indirect costs into account - those passed on to 'downstream' users such as carmakers - the researchers project total costs "should be no more than 1.5 - 2.3 times the direct costs".
Commenting on their findings, the scientists say "economic analysis confirms that costs of this magnitude are unlikely to harm European industry". They add that the 'Storm' scenario put forward in a previous study by Arthur D. Little for the German chemicals industry, which implies that total costs are 650 times the direct costs, show "implausible results, based on numerous errors and exaggerations".
They further argue that, since regulatory requirement will be eased on small-volume new substances, REACH will help by "boosting innovation and improving the competitive position of European producers". Furthermore, they add that "early action on environmental hazards will lighten the burden on downstream users and create substantial savings in areas including worker safety, waste disposal, remediation and liability claims".
All in all, they conclude, "European industry will gain the competitive advantage of being the first to move towards cleaner and safer production and use of chemicals".
Source: EurActiv, October 18, 2004
Twelve major industries from the manufacturing sector have joined forces in asking for an opt-out from the EU's draft chemicals regulation, REACH.
The association - known as the REACH Alliance - represents the so-called 'downstream users' of chemicals in cement, ceramics, glass, gypsum, iron & steel, lime, minerals, non-ferrous metals, ores, paper, and pre-cast and ready-mixed concrete.
In a statement on Wednesday 20 October, the twelve said the regulation would have "significant consequences" for their industries, claiming it will "seriously affect their competitiveness".
It pointed out that, contrary to other raw materials sectors such as gas, coal and crude oil, the raw materials used by the downstream users of chemicals will be subject to registration under REACH. Industries, the alliance argues, "should receive the same treatment and not be at a competitive disadvantage" with others using different raw materials.
In a separate move, EuroCommerce published a new study on 20 October analysing the impact of REACH on the retail, wholesale and trade sectors. Prepared by consultants Risk & Policy Analysts, the study indicates that the most significant impacts of REACH are the "requirements for registration or notification of substances" imported from outside the EU. According to the study, the "total direct costs to the commerce sector of REACH are between 850 million euro and 960 million euro". However, it points out that this figure is "subject to uncertainty".
Basing itself on the study, EuroCommerce argues REACH will "challenge" supply chain management by asking information on each substance to be provided individually. In a position paper, it proposed a series of amendments relating mainly to imports. It argued the draft legislation "might constitute discriminatory treatment" since the importer has to register all the different substances contained in preparations, which could de facto constitute a barrier to trade.
Source: EurActiv, 21 October 2004
Responding to an invitation, Cefic made a proposal to the Commission for a comprehensive, EU-wide exercise - a Strategic Partnership on REACH Testing (SPORT). A joint paper was agreed outlining SPORT .
SPORT provides an opportunity to test the workability of the REACH proposal, and to identify solutions where problems are found. It supplements the Commission's work on the REACH Implementation Projects (RIPs), and will provide input to the development of cost-effective implementation solutions. From the industry's side, the exercise will involve manufacturers/importers as well as downstream users, and will be facilitated by independent consultants. A Steering Committee consisting of the main actors will manage SPORT.
As SPORT sets out to simulate as realistically as possible the implementation of REACH by the main actors, it requires sufficient time to be completed. The aim is to publish a final report in mid 2005. However, interim findings will be reported as they become available.
Alain Perroy, Director General of Cefic, said: "We support the political objectives of REACH and since the very beginning we have made proposals to ensure REACH will deliver benefits for health and the environment in the most effective manner. SPORT is another contribution of the EU industry to contribute to a successful REACH for all parties concerned. We therefore welcome the opportunity to collaborate with the Commission."
Cefic is also involved in another project with respect to REACH, i.e. further work on impact assessment. The work is being carried out in collaboration with other stakeholders under the Commission's umbrella. The two projects have different objectives and deliverables and are running separately, but they are complementary.
Source: CEFIC News (e-spotlight), Issue, 25, October 2004
A letter calling for urgent action on the European Research Council, a pan-European funding organization for basic research at European level, was published in the August edition of Science Magazine. The appeal is drafted by the Initiative for Science in Europe (ISE) and co-signed by many of the leading European scientific organizations. The ISE writes in its press release that "a mass petition of this kind on science policy is almost unheard of in Europe and indicates the importance these organizations attach to the ERC debate".
The letter says that an ERC is needed to ensure that Europe funds the best research and to combat the fragmentation of research efforts at European level. It is also needed to urgently regain the ground lost vis-à-vis the United States in attracting foreign scientists and in simply just retaining Europe's own brains. According to the letter, Europe's performance in scientific publishing and Nobel prizes has deteriorated as well.
The appeal welcomes the preparatory work done so far by the Commission on basic research and on setting up an ERC . However, the letter warns that if special attention is not given to the ERC, the project may be shelved in favor of other more short-term issues. The focus of the ERC is on the long-term benefits of basic research for a knowledge-based society.
The Member States are very positive about the idea and the Research Commissioner Philippe Busquin hopes that a decision on the European Research Council for basic research would be agreed during the Dutch Presidency before end of December 2004.
Source: CORDIS News, August 28, 2004
At a conference held on 15 October 2004, over sixty senior representatives from EU institutions, industry and NGOs discussed potential ways forward for the struggling Lisbon agenda . The aim was to make recommendations to the Barroso Commission of how to embrace its responsibility to help get EU competitiveness back on track.
Several main messages evolved from the discussion. In particular, participants agreed that the constant comparison between the US and the EU economies was not very useful. "Being competitive does not necessarily mean being the same," one MEP pointed out.
"Europe is different from the US and Japan," a Commission official added. "Let's build on those things that are strongly European. Perceived constraints such as environmental and social standards can be turned into opportunities." Instead, there was a strong agreement that better benchmarking was needed within Europe.
In this respect, the environmental and social pillars of the Lisbon process must not be neglected. "The old-fashioned debate in which competitiveness is seen as a prerequisite for sustainable development is wrong," one senior official emphasized. "Europe must seize its opportunities in the areas that it can lead on, such as resource efficiency."
Source: EurActiv News, October 19, 2004
At the IVTIP Secretariat we received an invitation to participate in a FP6 Consortium to accelerate drug development. They draw our attention to the New Safe Medicines Faster (NSMF) initiative working on shortening the time for drug development, www.nsmf.org.
Recently the European Commission issued the 3rd call on priority 1: Life Sciences, Genomics and Biotechnology for Health with a deadline of 16-Nov-2004: It contained a reference to 'New approaches for accelerated development of new, safe and more effective medicines - INTEGRATED PROJECT. The focus of this topic is to propose a new comprehensive approach to drug development utilising recent and emerging scientific accomplishments. Bottlenecks/barriers in the current drug development process must be identified and solutions elaborated to overcome them. The consortium should involve all relevant stakeholders (e.g. academia, clinicians, patient organisations, large industry, SMEs, regulatory and ethics specialists etc.).
A consortium is being established with Dr. Jørgen Dirach, MD, MBA, MFPM; Novo Nordisk, Denmark as coordinator. For item 2 in the call, the consortium has selected cancer and diabetes as disease areas to start on. Dr Dirach is member of the EAPB Board and Chairman of the EFB Section on Medicines Development
If you are interested in participating in the consortium behind an application for this call, please contact Dr Dirach (jdi@novonordisk.com) and kim.meulenbroeks@efbpublic.org.
On 16 June 2004, the European Commission presented its suggestions as regards the future EU research policy in a communication entitled "Science and technology, the key to Europe's future - Guidelines for future European Union policy to support research".
In this interesting document, the Commission proposes, among other measures, to double the annual budget allocated to European research for the duration of the next Framework Programme (FP7), to organise the EU action around 6 major objectives (such as the creation of European centres of excellence and the development of research infrastructures) in order to increase its impact, and to improve the functioning of the future Framework Programme through its revision and simplification in the light of the experience acquired under the precedent Framework Programmes.
Please note that an open consultation will shortly be launched by the Commission in order to give all interested parties the possibility to express their opinion as regards these propositions.
» Communication from the European Commission "Science and technology, the key to Europe's future - Guidelines for future European Union policy to support research" COM (2004) 353
» Related press release of the European Commission
Source: IPR Helpdesk News June 18 2004
The European Commission has, in co-operation with EuropaBio and CEFIC, launched a European 'Technology Platform for Sustainable Chemistry' to maintain and strengthen the competitiveness and sustainability of the chemical industry in Europe. The platform aims at establishing a long-term public-private partnership, involving industry, research centres, financial services and regulatory authorities at European level.
The main objective is to increase investment in research and innovation in three key technology areas:
These areas are seen to be key for transforming the European chemical industry and for creating new opportunities for enterprises. Moreover, as they hold a wide range of potential applications, they can make an important impact on society and on the development of new sustainable technologies by reducing the usage of water and energy, producing new and intelligent materials, furthering renewable energies and new manufacturing processes.
The platform aims to deliver in a number of specific areas:
See also: Commission press release: EU chemical and biotech players join forces to foster sustainable and competitive chemistry
Source: EurActiv, July 7, 2004
The long awaited Marimon report on the mid-term evaluation of the new instruments of the EU's Sixth Framework Programme (FP6) was presented to the informal Competitiveness Council on 3 July 2004. The report contains 12 recommendations on ways to make the Integrated Projects (IPs) and Networks of Excellence (NoEs) more effective.
The report addresses the following main issues:
Source: CORDIS News, July 7, 2004
The Commission published its response to the Marimon report on 27 August. It points out that many of the expert panel's recommendations actually match the Commission's own findings and that it has already taken 'corrective measures' on some points.
It also states that the period reviewed by the panel is only to a limited extent representative of the full term of the FP6, since the evaluation was carried out during the year in which most of the projects using the new instruments had just been launched. The Communication outlines an analysis on, and an answer to each of the 12 recommendations.
The Commission's reactions to the main recommendations made by the expert panel can be summarised as follows:
The 'corrective measures' that can already be introduced in the FP6 will be taken before December 2004, most of them before October. The remaining measures will be included in the proposal for FP7, which is scheduled for early 2005.
Source: CORDIS News, September 16, 2004
For some time now observers in Brussels have been reporting that the first sighting of the legislative proposal to revise Directive 86/609 was not likely to be made before 2005. In September this timetable was confirmed by Dr Beatrice Lucaroni, from DG Research, speaking at a workshop organised by EFPIA, the European pharmaceutical industry association.
Dr. Lucaroni said that the Animal Health and Welfare Panel of EFSA, the European Food Safety Authority, had been asked to give an opinion on the content of the revised Directive, and that this was not expected until March 2005. After this the proposal would be drafted and there would be a further stakeholder consultation, and only afterwards would the legislative proposal be finalised and passed to the European Parliament.
The EFSA panel have been asked to give opinions on a number of issues including:
The stakeholder consultation which will follow the publication of the draft proposal will be open to a far wider range of groups and opinions than was the Technical Expert Working Group (see EBRA Bulletin Summer 2003), which reported last year. Patient representatives at the EFPIA workshop said they felt particularly strongly about not having been consulted earlier, and they are likely to press for their views to be taken just as seriously as those of the animal rights groups in the consultation process.
One thing that still remains unclear is how and when the proposed revised Directive will be subject to an impact assessment. All EU legislation has to be given an impact assement to judge what effect it will have on areas such as competitiveness, health, the environment and others. These impact assessments can be conducted in one of two ways - giving either a simple or a more detailed assessment. EFPIA is now calling for a full and detailed impact assessment to be conducted on the draft revised directive at an early stage.
Source: EBRA Bulletin, October 2004
The INeMM-CNR (Istituto di Neurobiologia e Medicina Molecolare-Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche), in collaboration with the European Commission, DG Research, Directorate E, has organised on October 27-28 in Brussels a Conference entitled: Up-dating concepts and languages in relation to the 3Rs model: reasons for recommendations, in order to discuss the outcome of the work performed under the EU Project QLRT-2001-00028, Anim.Al.See - Alternative methods in animal experimentation: evaluating scientific, ethical and social issues in the 3Rs context. At the Cambridge meeting, IVTIP's Executive Secretary will give a report on the outcome of the conference. Please consult the minutes of the Cambridge meeting and the presentation given for details.
Further Information: Flavia Zucco, f.zucco@inemm.cnr.it
The UK government is to establish a national centre to promote "best practice" in animal experimentation. The new institute, which will be called the National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research (NC3Rs) will develop a UK strategy for the implementation of the three R's, fund high quality research in the three R's, advise scientists on the three R's and animal welfare and promote the acceptance of alternative methods for toxicity testing.
UK Science Minister Lord Sainsbury said, "No scientist wants to use animals, but sometimes it is absolutely necessary. However, I believe strongly that a major opportunity now exists to make progress in replacing, refining and reducing the use of animals and improving their welfare."
Source: EBRA Bulletin October 2004
In addition, the UK government announced that the Centre for Best Practice for Animals in Research (CBPAR) will form the core of the above mentioned NC3Rs. The NC3Rs will continue the work which CBPAR started to develop, promote and disseminate information on animal welfare and the 3Rs.
As of 23 September 2004 the new contact details have become available:
NC3Rs
20 Park Crescent
London W1B 1AL
NC3Rs staff can be contacted using the following email format: firstname.surname@nc3rs.org.uk
i.e.
Dr Vicky Robinson, Head of NC3Rs: vicky.robinson@nc3rs.org.uk
Dr Laura Playle, NC3Rs Programme Manager: laura.playle@nc3rs.org.uk
Dr Mark Prescott, NC3Rs Programme Manager: mark.prescott@nc3rs.org.uk
Ms Ashley Scott, NC3Rs Administration Manager: ashley.scott@nc3rs.org.uk
Miss Gayle Farr, NC3Rs Administrator: gayle.farr@nc3rs.org.uk
Tel: +44 20 7670 5331
Fax: +44 20 7670 5178
For general enquiries please e-mail: enquiries@nc3rs.org.uk
Web site: www.nc3rs.org.uk
A French group (Pierre Olivier and co-workers) have very recently produced and characterized an immortalized human brain endothelial cell line hCMEC/D3 that stably retains morphological characteristics of primary brain endothelial cells and expresses specific brain endothelial markers and cell surface adhesion molecules. Moreover, hCMEC/D3 cells display highly restricted paracellular permeability to hydrophilic molecules and permeability to several standard compounds that can be correlated to their in vivo brain perfusion capacity. The authors believe that this cell line can constitute a very promising in vitro model of human BBB. A patent application (through INSERM) and a manuscript will be submitted within a couple of weeks. The authors are looking for an industrial partnership on this topics. They would be very happy to enter scientific discussions, under a confidentiality agreement.
If you are interested, please contact: Dr. Pierre-Olivier COURAUD
Directeur de Recherche; Directeur du Département de Biologie cellulaire
Institut COCHIN; INSERM U567 - CNRS UMR8104; 2 rue Méchain
75014 PARIS &endash; France; Tel: (33)1 40 51 64 01; Fax: (33)1 40 51 64 30
e-mail: couraud@cochin.inserm.fr
The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences will invest $13 million to map the DNA of 15 mouse strains important to laboratory research on human health. This initiative, called the "Resequencing Project" will launch the Institute's Center for Roden Genetics."
More info: see http://www.niehs.nih.gov/oc/news/micedna.htm
The Gates Foundation is supporting the California Stem Cell Initiative, along with many other high profile groups and individuals. This important initiative, to be voted on in November, would raise $3 billion -- $300 million per year for 10 years -- for stem cell research ONLY in California. This level of funding has the potential to rapidly accelerate the application of these powerful stem cell technologies towards developing novel drugs and therapeutic approaches for treating devastating diseases. Currently, the support for this initiative is ahead in the polls.
Source: http://www.curesforcalifornia.com
GenOway has entered into a research agreement with Pfizer to provide Pfizer researchers in the USA with a genetically modified rat model based on GenOway's nuclear transfer technology. GenOway is the European leader in transgenesis and develops tailor-made transgenic animal models, with a focus on the rat and mouse.
On 15 September, Oxford University asked the High Court to impose a draconian injunction against animal rights protesters, demanding that they effectively be banned from the city centre. The university said it had been forced to act to protect its proposed biomedical research facility, where experiments on a range of animals, including primates, are due to be conducted once it is complete. The institution said its contractors had been harassed and intimidated by a group of protesters to the extent that the work could not continue.
Lawyers representing Oxford claimed the group campaigning against animal experimentation at the university, called Speak, consisted of the same individuals who demonstrated against a similar facility at Cambridge University, which was subsequently abandoned.They also said the protesters were the same individuals who have subjected the Huntingdon Life Sciences laboratory in Cambridgeshire to a campaign of harassment, a charge they deny.
The University's lawyer told the High Court: "What they did at Cambridge, they are going to do at Oxford. They want to stop the laboratory being built. This campaign has the marks of going out of control. It has the marks of becoming quite violent. We are not seeking to prevent freedom of speech. This order is designed to protect the claimant from being harassed."
The university asked the High Court to impose an order preventing protesters from demonstrating or "loitering" within 50 yards of any university building, effectively stopping them from entering large areas of the city centre.It also asked for an injunction preventing protesters from threatening, harassing or pestering its employees. This, it said, should include using any kind of instrument.
The university admitted the proposed injunction was draconian, but said that it would not object to the protesters demonstrating in a designated area opposite its new biomedical research laboratory site. But the High Court should impose an order preventing more than 25 demonstrators gathering at the site for longer than four hours.
The hearing was adjourned to allow the defendants more time to prepare their case. Mr Justice Simon granted the university a temporary injunction banning protesters from intimidating or harassing its employees.
Source: EBRA Bulletin, October 2004
The Netherlands now boasts a National Toxicogenomics Centre (NTC). NTC combines the genomics activities of the most important Dutch institutions in this area: University of Maastricht, RIVM, TNO en RIKILT. NTC will devote itself to the development of novel methods for the safety testing of chemicals, based on genomics, which may offer an alternative to animal based tests. NTCs objective is the delivery of a scientific basis for the development of these genomic-based tests. Reserach into alternatives for animal testing is a key area for the National Programme on Genomics; within this programme, 1 m_ has been reserved specifically for this purpose.
Contact:
Prof.Dr. Jos Kleinjans . Nationaal Toxicogenomics CentreTelefoon 043 388 1096
E-mail J.kleinjans@GRAT.unimaas.nl
Source: National Program Genomics, May 27, 2004, press release
SkinEthic Laboratories is now quoted on the EURONEXT in Paris, Marché Libre. The IPO took place on July 16, 2004 at 6 euro per share. You can find more information clicking the links below.
News in English: http://www.investincotedazur.com/uk/ne/ne000.htm
News in French: http://www.investincotedazur.com/fr/ne/ne000.htm
At the forefront of leading research in the field of in vitro toxicology, ECVAM invites qualified individuals to join their expanding multi-disciplinary research team. The selected candidates will work with international renowned thought leaders in the field of toxicology, in a highly collaborative work environment. Further information is available on the following websites http://ecvam.jrc.it and http://ihcp.jrc.cec.eu.int/ .
ECVAM is looking for a student that is interested in a Master thesis project. in the group for reproductive toxicity testing, and addresses the use of mouse embryonic stem cell differentiation into heart muscle cells as toxicological endpoint for developmental cardiotoxicity testing. Basic skills in English are obligatory.
Deadline for applications: 30th November 2004
ECVAM contact person on the project: Lars Hareng, lars.hareng@jrc.it
Information on the formal application procedure: Follow this link. The same information can also be downloaded from the ECVAM website homepage: News, Events and Meetings
The National Toxicology Program (NTP) Interagency Center for the Evaluation of Alternative Toxicological Methods (NICEATM) announced the availability of "Updated Standardized In Vitro Cytotoxicity Test Method Protocols for Estimating Acute Oral Systemic Toxicity" and issued a request for in vivo and in vitro acute toxicity data in the Federal Register today.
The in vitro cytotoxicity test method protocols will be used to estimate acute oral systemic toxicity in rodents. These two test methods have been recommended by the ICCVAM for selecting starting doses for in vivo acute oral systemic toxicity tests in order to reduce the number of animals required for acute oral toxicity testing.
NICEATM also requests the submission of data on chemicals and products tested for both acute oral systemic toxicity and in vitro cytotoxicity using the standardized test method protocols mentioned in this notice. These data will be used to further evaluate the usefulness and limitations of cytotoxicity methods for estimating in vivo acute oral toxicity and support the investigation of other test methods necessary to improve the accuracy of in vitro assessments of acute systemic toxicity.
Please submit data to
NICEATM, Dr. William S. Stokes, Director, NICEATM
(e-mail) iccvam@niehs.nih.gov
The ICCVAM and NICEATM web site is located at: http://iccvam.niehs.nih.gov/.
For more information on acute oral toxicity, please visit the in vitro test methods page http://iccvam.niehs.nih.gov/methods/invitro.htm
Europa.eu.int/comm./research/infocentre/index_en.cfm
Industrial
research:
Europa.eu.int/comm./research/industrial_technologies/index_en.html
Marie Curie
actions:
Europa.eu.int/comm./research/fp6/mariecurie-actions/indexhtm_en.html
Europa.eu.int/comm./research/infocentre/index_en.cfm
The Scientific Committee on Cosmetic Products and Non-food products intended for Consumers has published the following opinions:
• Opinion concerning UVASORB K2A adopted on 1 July 2004 by means of the written procedure.
http://europa.eu.int/comm/health/ph_risk/committees/sccp/documents/out290_en.pdf
• Opinion concerning Benzisothiazolinone Colipa n° P96 adopted on 1 July 2004 by means of the written procedure.
http://europa.eu.int/comm/health/ph_risk/committees/sccp/documents/out289_en.pdf
• Opinion concerning Iodopropynyl Butylcarbamate Colipa n° P91 adopted on 1 July 2004 by means of the written procedure.
http://europa.eu.int/comm/health/ph_risk/committees/sccp/documents/out288_en.pdf
• Opinion concerning Dibutylphtalate adopted on 1 July 2004 by means of the written procedure.
http://europa.eu.int/comm/health/ph_risk/committees/sccp/documents/out287_en.pdf
• Opinion concerning Lead Acetate adopted on 1 July 2004 by means of the written procedure.
http://europa.eu.int/comm/health/ph_risk/committees/sccp/documents/out286_en.pdf
• Opinion concerning Report for Establishing the Timetable for Phasing out Animal Testing for the purpose of the Cosmetics Directive issued by ECVAM (30/04/2004) adopted on 1 July 2004 by means of the written procedure.
http://europa.eu.int/comm/health/ph_risk/committees/sccp/documents/out285_en.pdf
Information: http://www.healthtech.com/2004/tbs/index.asp
Information: aparsons@healthtech.com
Information:
http://www.euconferences.com/frananotechnology04.htm
or gavin.stephens@euconferences.com
Information: In Vitro Toxicology Society (IVTS), g.kass@surrey.ac.uk
Information: Mary Ann Brown,
Cambridge Healthtech Institute
Fax: 617-630-1325 •
E-mail: mabrown@healthtech.com