Replacement of Animal Tests
|
Trend: Microdosing to identify drug effectiveness earlier
In a ruling issued January 12, 2006, the FDA indicated that it would allow investigators to test very tiny doses of new drugs on humans to identify sooner which drugs have a chance of reaching the market. Full scale human testing is very expensive, so this should help cut costs as well as make drugs safer. According to the LA Times:
"Drug development is very, very high risk and the failure rate is still too high," said Dr. Raymond Woosley, president of the C-Path Institute, a nonprofit organization based at the University of Arizona, which aims to speed the development of new drugs without compromising safety. "This is an important step toward getting greater efficiency and more modern science into the drug development process." …Such testing would replace some, though not all, of the early experiments now carried out on animals. The results are expected to be more accurate than animal testing alone in predicting which compounds should go to full-scale clinical trials with larger numbers of human volunteers…Nine out of 10 experimental drugs fail in human studies, [acting FDA Commissioner] Dr. Andrew von Eschenbach noted. Drugs "behave differently in people than in animals," he said.
|
For seven years, Tom's of Maine petitioned the American Dental Association (ADA) to grant its seal of approval to its toothpastes. Toothpaste companies routinely conduct lethal tests on rats in order to be eligible for the ADA seal. Tom's of Maine worked with researchers to develop fluoride tests that could safely be conducted on human volunteers. The ADA finally accepted the results of these tests and granted its seal to several of the company's toothpastes in 1995. The groundbreaking effort by Tom's of Maine to find a humane alternative to routine practices sets a precedent that other manufacturers can follow in the future.
|
In 2003 Procter & Gamble was recognized by the Humane Society of the U.S. for its financial and scientific commitment to advancing alternatives to animal testing and for its instrumental support in the passage and strengthening of the Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods. This committee is made up of several federal agencies that work together to advance alternatives to animal testing. “By providing industry leadership and much needed financial support, Procter & Gamble has moved the theory of alternatives to animal testing out of academics and into the real world of the product testing laboratory,” said Dr. Andrew Rowan, HSUS senior vice president for research, education and international issues. “Their efforts in this area have saved lives and prevented needless suffering for thousands of animals.”
|
 |
| European Union |
|
EU Animal Testing Ban for Cosmetics In November, 2002, the Council and European Parliament reached an agreement on the main points of the Directive on cosmetics. The new directive aims at improving animal welfare without jeopardising consumer safety and the protection of human health, while enabling the Community to respect its international obligations. This will be achieved by introducing an immediate ban where alternative non-animal tests are available. Where an alternative is not readily available, the deadline for the complete ban is 2009. In the case of three tests that are particularly difficult to replace, the due date is 2013. |
Logos that appear on this page may be registered trademarks. |
|
