This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Commission unveils details on plan for phasing out animaltesting for chemicals safety At the REACH and CLP regulators’ meeting in July, the European Commission revealed specifics about its formal schedule to eliminate animaltesting used for chemical safety assessment.
Commission redoubles commitment to reduce animaltesting in response to Citizens’ Initiative The European Commission provided its mandatory response to a citizens’ petition this week urging faster action to reduce and ultimately eliminate animaltesting within the cosmetics and chemical sectors.
The next key area concerns the ongoing shift away from animaltesting. For example, under the REACH (1907/2006/EC) and CLP (1272/2008/EC) regulations, NAMs are generally only used to replace animaltesting for hazard identification and classification of skin sensitizers.
The guidance looks very different from the draft that was published in February 2020, including changes in the scope of the guidance, its sponsorship, and the removal of all mentions of nonhuman primates for animaltesting. Nonclinical studies encompass much more than just animal studies.
This also has clear potential to reduce animaltesting, another key commitment made by the Commission. The Commission draws an analogy between the restriction and exemption process found in RoHS to the authorization and restriction processes (titles VII and VIII, respectively) found in the REACH Regulation (1907/2006/EC).
For example, the FDA does not have a proposed rule listed that would change how it regulates animaltesting requirements following the passage of the FDA Modernization Act 2.0 It’s also interesting to see what isn’t on this list. provisions of the Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act (FDORA) in 2022.
Adapted from Yoshiki and Moriwaki (2006). ” It’s an uncharitable take, but when drugs fail as often as they do despite animaltesting, it’s not hard to see the JAX mice as a metaphor for a biomedical enterprise cloistered away from the real world. Origins of mice used in research. Image Credit: JAX Handbook.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 15,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content