4.2 million and counting… The animal toll for REACH systemic toxicity studies
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The EU’s chemicals regulation, REACH, requires that most chemicals in the EU be evaluated for human health and ecosystem risks, with a mandate to minimize use of animal tests for these evaluations. The REACH process has been ongoing since about 2008, but a calculation of the resulting animal use is not publicly available. For this reason, we have undertaken a count of animals used for REACH. With EU legislators set to consider REACH revisions that could expand animal testing, we are releasing results for test categories counted to date: reproductive toxicity tests, developmental toxicity tests, and repeated-dose toxicity tests for human health. The total animal count as of December 2022 for these categories is about 2.9 million. Additional tests involving about 1.3 million animals are currently required by a final proposal authorization or compliance check but not yet completed. The total, 4.2 million, for just these three test categories exceeds the original European Commission forecast of 2.6 million for all REACH tests. The difference is primarily because the European Commission estimate excluded offspring, which are most of the animals used for REACH. Other reasons for the difference are extra animals included in tests to ensure sufficient survive to meet the minimum test requirement; dose range-finding tests; extra test animal groups, e.g., for recovery analysis; and a high rejection rate of read-across studies. Given higher than forecast animal use, the upcoming debate on proposed REACH revisions is an opportunity to refocus on reducing animal numbers in keeping with the REACH mandate.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is appropriately cited (CC-BY). Copyright on any article in ALTEX is retained by the author(s).
EC – European Commission (2001). White Paper – Strategy for a future Chemicals Policy. COM(2001) 88 final.
ECHA (2013). Evaluation under REACH: Progress report 2012. ECHA-13-A-01-EN. https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/17221/evaluation_report_2012_en.pdf/fa360388-4c23-4816-90be-09812061e12f
ECHA (2014). Evaluation under REACH: Progress report 2013. ECHA-14-A-01-EN. doi:10.2823/22707
ECHA (2015). Survey results – Analysis of higher tier studies submitted without testing proposals. ECHA-15-R-13-EN. doi:10.2823/11412
ECHA (2016). Report on the Operation of REACH and CLP 2016, ECHA-16-R-08-EN
ECHA (2017a). Guidance on Information Requirements and Chemical Safety Assessment – Chapter R.7a: Endpoint specific guidance. ECHA-17-G-18-EN. doi:10.2823/337352
ECHA (2017b). Evaluation under REACH: Progress report 2016. ECHA-17-R-03-EN. doi:10.2823/588707
ECHA (2017c). The use of alternatives to testing on animals for the REACH regulation. Third report under Article 117(3) of the REACH Regulation. June 2017. ECHA-17-R-02-EN. doi:10.2823/023078
ECHA (2017d). Read-Across Assessment Framework (RAAF). ECHA-17-R-01-EN. doi:10.2823/619212
ECHA (2018). Evaluation under REACH: Progress report 2017. ECHA-18-R-05-EN. doi:10.2823/76886
ECHA (2020). The use of alternatives to testing on animals for the REACH regulation. Fourth report under Article 117(3) of the REACH Regulation. June 2020. ECHA-20-R-08-EN. doi:10.2823/092305
ECHA (2021). Report on the Operation of REACH and CLP 2021. ECHA-21-R-06-EN. doi:10.2823/041059
ECHA (2023). The use of alternatives to testing on animals for the REACH Regulation. Fifth report under Article 117(3) of the REACH Regulation. June 2023. ECHA-23-R-07-EN. doi:10.2823/805454
Hofer, T., Gerner, I., Gundert-Remy, U. et al. (2004). Animal testing and alternative approaches for the human health risk assessment under the proposed new European chemicals regulation. Arch Toxicol 78, 549-564. doi:10.1007/s00204-004-0577-9
OECD (2018a). Test No. 408: Repeated Dose 90-Day Oral Toxicity Study in Rodents. OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4. OECD Publishing, Paris. doi:10.1787/9789264070707-en
OECD (2018b). Test No. 412: Subacute Inhalation Toxicity: 28-Day Study. OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4. OECD Publishing, Paris. doi:10.1787/9789264070783-en
Pedersen, F., de Bruijn, J., Munn, S. et al. (2003). Assessment of additional testing needs under REACH – Effects of (Q)SARs, risk based testing and voluntary industry initiatives. Joint Research Centre Report EUR 20863.
Rovida, C. and Hartung, T. (2009). Re-evaluation of animal numbers and costs for in vivo tests to accomplish REACH legislation requirements for chemicals – A report by the Transatlantic Think Tank for Toxicology (t4). ALTEX 26, 187-208. doi:10.14573/altex.2009.3.187
Rovida, C., Barton-Maclaren, T., Benfenati, E. et al. (2020). Internationalisation of read-across as a validated new approach method (NAM) for regulatory toxicology. ALTEX 37, 579-606. doi:10.14573/altex.1912181
Taylor, K., Stengel, W., Casalegno, C. et al. (2014). Experiences of the REACH testing proposals system to reduce animal testing. ALTEX 31, 107-128. doi:10.14573/altex.1311151
Taylor, K. (2018). Ten years of REACH – An animal protection perspective. Altern Lab Anim 46, 347-373. doi:10.1177/026119291804600610
van der Jagt, K., Munn, S., Tørsløv, J. et al., J. (2004). Alternative approaches can reduce the use of test animals under REACH. JRC Report EUR 21405 EN