Member of the European Parliament (MEP) Bob van den Bos hosted a seminar in Brussels on May 7 on "Alternatives to Animal Testing: Opportunities and Limitations in the Regulatory Framework." It was held in the light of proposed new regulations on chemical safety in the European Union (EU), formally presented by the European Commission on May 7. These regulations would require companies to do more to assess and manage the risks of chemicals they produce or use, removing the burden of proof about chemical safety from public authorities and imposing it on industry.

Van den Bos told The Scientist, "The proposed new regulations will lead to a substantial increase in animal tests: between 10 million, according to the commission, and 22 million according to animal welfare organizations. The subject of alternatives to animal testing must be given more attention within the EU. We also need more funding at national and European levels to support the development of alternative methods."

This is re-invigorating the search for alternatives to animal testing. The EU Council Directive 86/609/EEC commits member states to research toward finding alternatives involving fewer animals or less painful procedures, but progress has been limited. In the opinion of the European Parliament, "…little progress has been made in replacing experiments on animals with alternative methods, which calls into question whether all reasonable endeavors have been made."

The audience at the seminar included MEPs, commission officials, and representatives of industry and animal welfare groups. The status of research, development, and legislation in the field was reviewed by Coenraad Hendriksen of the Netherlands Centre for Alternatives to Animal Use and Utrecht University.

Hendriksen outlined some progress, but emphasized that acceptance of alternatives will be difficult and time-consuming because of the need for more research and development, the bureaucracy of the validation process, and the costs. He recommended, "The issue needs to be pushed higher on the EU's regulatory agenda… conflicting EU regulations should be harmonized… and Directive 86/609/EEC should be fully implemented by the member states."

Article 7 of this directive states, "An experiment shall not be performed if another scientifically satisfactory method of obtaining the results sought, not entailing the use of an animal, is reasonably and practically available."

Richard Ley of the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry told The Scientist, "The pharmaceutical industry in the UK alone spends more than £300 million [$477 million] per year on developing and using alternatives to animals. We have seen big reductions in the amount of animals used, but testing on animals will undoubtedly need to continue for many years."

In a related development on May 12, European Research Commissioner Philippe Busquin will announce the validation of some new alternative methods to animal testing. The tests on human blood cells will replace tests on animals to check for the presence of fever-causing agents in drugs, sparing the lives of 200,000 rabbits per year. The commission presents this as evidence of their efforts to "Replace, Reduce, and Refine" the use of animals—the "3 Rs," which form the centerpiece of efforts in this field.