DONATE
FOR PHYSICIANS
HEALTH AND NUTRITION
ETHICAL RESEARCH & EDUCATION
MEDIA CENTER
  News Releases
  Dr. Barnard's Blog
  Experts
  Good Medicine Magazine
  Commentary
  PSAs
  Media Contacts
  PCRM Online
  Artwork
LEGISLATIVE FOCUS
CLINICAL RESEARCH
EDUCATIONAL LITERATURE
MEMBERSHIP
SHOP

CONNECT WITH PCRM

 

 

    


PCRM Asks Congress for Chemical Tests That Protect Humans and Animals

Ensuring that industrial chemicals are safe presents a monumental challenge. PCRM’s congressional testimony last month urged toxicity testing reforms that would meet this challenge and better protect animals in laboratories and humans.

live ferrets are unlawfully used in invasive and often lethal procedures at University of Washington“Twenty-first-century chemical regulation needs 21st-century toxicity testing,” PCRM toxicologist Kristie Sullivan, M.P.H., informed members of the Senate in her written testimony on assessing the effectiveness of U.S. chemical safety laws. “If carried out thoughtfully, reform of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) represents an unprecedented opportunity to implement an effective program of chemical assessment and management.”

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is trying to meet the demand for quicker assessment of a wider range of chemicals through TSCA, a 35-year-old U.S. law that regulates industrial chemicals. But evaluating the backlog of approximately 80,000 chemicals is not feasible because toxicity testing methods rely on animal testing. Current testing is largely based on experiments on animals—rodents, rabbits, dogs—and uses methods that are time-consuming, expensive, and in some cases use thousands of animals apiece. For example, a single reproductive toxicity study requires a minimum of two years, $380,000, and 2,600 animals.

In her testimony, Sullivan recommended that TSCA incorporate recommendations made by the National Research Council’s Toxicity Testing in the 21st Century: A Vision and Strategy. The report, which the EPA commissioned, calls for the development of human-based in vitro cell and tissue tests instead of animal tests for hazard assessment and chemical regulation. Sullivan also outlined principles for prioritizing chemicals for toxicity testing and ways to ensure implementation of new testing technologies.

PCRM also recently worked with DoSomething.org to feature “11 Myths About Animal Testing,”which dispels common myths about animal testing for cosmetics, household cleaners, and other products. On DoSomething.org, you can learn the truth behind animal testing myths such as:

  • MYTH: All animals in laboratories have some legal protection.
  • MYTH: Some animals get to live happy lives once they are not needed for any more testing.
  • MYTH: There aren't any alternatives to animal tests.
  • MYTH: There is nothing I can do to stop animal suffering in laboratories.

To read a transcript of Sullivan’s Senate testimony, visit ReformToxicityTesting.org. To read “11 Myths About Animal Testing,” visit DoSomething.org.



Kristie Sullivan, M.P.H.
Kristie Sullivan, M.P.H.


PCRM Online, March 2011

Support PCRM
 
This site does not provide medical or legal advice. This Web site is for informational purposes only.
Full Disclaimer | Privacy Policy

Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine
5100 Wisconsin Ave., N.W., Ste.400, Washington DC, 20016
Phone: 202-686-2210     Email: pcrm@pcrm.org