Animal Testing

The law requires certain chemicals, such as pharmaceuticals and crop protection products, to be tested on animals before they are approved for sale or use. It is only proper that this testing should be allowed to continue. The UK chemical industry understands and appreciates public concerns about animal testing and has stated its desire to minimise the use of animals to test chemical products and to seek alternative test methods which do not involve animals.

The industry is already involved in seeking alternative test methods, but it will be necessary to ensure that these methods fully meet regulatory requirements before they can be regarded as satisfactory replacements. In addition the industry has committed to the exchange of test results between companies in order to avoid unnecessary duplication of tests as a further means of reducing the level of animal testing.

All animal testing falls within the framework of the Scientific Procedures Act 1986, which controls such research in the UK.

In the event that it is necessary to use animal studies to determine possible hazards, the UK chemical industry has adopted the following principles:

Notes for Editors:

  1. The chemical industry is one of the worldís most international, competitive and successful industries. At the forefront of modern technology, it is a prime wealth creating sector, serving global markets and producing a multiplicity of products essential to modern lifestyles. Almost every other industry and activity depends in some way on the products of the chemical industry.
  2. The industry recognises that the occupational safety and health of its employees, the safety of the environment of the communities in which it operates, and the well-being of its customers and eventual consumers, as well as the public as a whole, demand that any potentially harmful characteristics of its products must be clearly identified and possible effects. In addition national and international legislation often requires that any potential effects of the industryís products on living systems be established.
  3. The UK chemical industry employs around 250,000 people and accounts for 2.5 % of GDP and 11.5 % of manufacturing industryís gross value added. In 1999 it produced and sold some £31 billion worth of chemical products. Capital investment totalled £2.8 billion and 9 % of sales was invested in R&D. It is manufacturing industryís top exporter, exporting over 72 % of production, and contributing around £4.5 billion annually to the UK balance of payments.
  4. The UK chemical industry was party to the principles agreed at the recent inaugural UK Chemicals Stakeholder Forum and which specifically state the animal testing be minimised where alternative methods are available. The forum has been established by DETR and is chaired by Lord Selborne. Further details can be found at:
    http://www.environment.detr.gov.uk/chemistrat/stakehol/index.htm
  5. The following may also be of assistance. It is taken from the Royal Society of Chemistryís chem-bytes e-zine:

The three Rs of animal testing

In their 1959 book The principles of humane experimental technique, William Russell and Rex Burch defined a strategy for minimising animal use without compromising the quality of scientific work. The three categories that they proposed are still used as a benchmark today.

Refinement alternatives

Methods that alleviate or minimise potential pain, suffering and distress, and which enhance animal well-being. For example, advances in techniques such as nuclear magnetic resonance, electron spin resonance and positron emission tomography permit non-invasive observations of processes occurring in internal organs.

Reduction alternatives

Methods for obtaining comparable levels of information from the use of fewer animals in scientific procedures, or for obtaining more information from the same number of animals. Mass spectrometry, for example, makes it possible to differentiate between a number of molecules given to a single animal at the same time. This method, known as cassette dosing, allowed researchers at Glaxo Wellcome to test 91 molecules in six weeks to find a lead component for treating bronchitis. Previously this would have taken 65 weeks.

Earlier this year, in a move that should dramatically reduce the number of animals needed to test for allergic contact dermatitis, four US agencies responsible for protecting public health approved the local lymph node assay (LLNA). Developed as a result of a collaboration between researchers at Zeneca, Central Toxicology Laboratory, Procter & Gamble and Unilever, LLNA tests mice instead of guinea pigs. The test uses a third to a half as many animals and causes less pain and distress than the ca 15 traditional tests, which rely on visual assessment of the likelihood of a substance causing allergy with repeated application on the skins of about 20-40 animals, and often use exaggerated doses. LLNA is faster ñ instead of taking three to four weeks, it can be completed in a week. Although LLNA requires the initial exposure to take place in vivo, subsequent steps are done in vitro.

Replacement alternatives

Methods that do not involve conduction experiments on whole, living animals. Some of these approaches are only relative replacements, because they entail the humane killing of an animal to obtain cells, tissues or organs for in vitro studies. Others are absolute replacements that do not require any biological material from a fully developed, vertebrate animal. Russell and Burch uphold that replacement is the ultimate goal for finding alternatives to animal testing.

In their 1959 book The principles of humane experimental technique, William Russell and Rex uphold that replacement is the ultimate goal for finding alternatives to animal testing.

Chemical Industries Association