Better Science VIII. CHALLENGES TO ALTERNATIVES In addition to the resistance described above, more direct threats to the adoption of alternatives and promotion of animal-based testing protocols may come from massive new testing programs being proposed by such federal regulatory bodies as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). For the past few years, under pressure from politicians as well as consumer and environmental organizations, the EPA has proposed new testing requirements that will kill millions of animals, tailored to: High Production Volume Chemicals (HPV) Endocrine Disruptors (ED) Children's Health Initiative (CHI) Nearly identical programs have also been proposed for the European Union (REACH) and internationally (OECD). In all cases the respective regulatory agencies have used the new testing mandates to promote existing or create new animal-based testing procedures - usually without the rigorous levels of validation and proof of principle still required for in vitro replacement alternatives. If needed, the new testing requirements could be used as incentives to finally create an alternatives-based, humane approach to assessing human health and safety. The fact that tens of thousands of chemicals have been and continue to be produced without adequate safety/risk assessments is a clear indication of the historical failures of in vivo approaches and not a reason to massively expand such inappropriate approaches to testing. << Back To Contents | Next Section >>

Other NEAVS Fact Sheets: Benefits of Non-Animal Tests | Xenotransplants | Animal Welfare Act | Limitations of Animal Tests | Non-Animal Product Safety Test Alternatives << Back to Better Science  | Home