logo
Animal Testing Under REACH: It's Time to Take 'Last Resort' Seriously

Animal Testing Under REACH: It's Time to Take 'Last Resort' Seriously

Euractiv08-07-2025
The European legal framework requires its Member States to pay full regard to animal welfare standards when formulating and implementing policies. Yet, when it comes to chemical safety, the EU's flagship regulation, REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals), still relies heavily on animal testing, despite its stated commitment to making this a 'last resort.'
REACH was designed with the core objective to protect people and the environment from dangerous chemicals. At the same time, the regulation claims to support and promote the use of non-animal methods as one of its overarching purposes, as outlined in its first article. In reality, this commitment is not being upheld: almost two decades into its implementation, REACH still relies on often-outdated testing methods, which involve not only significant animal suffering, but questionable scientific reliability.
REACH promotes the use of alternatives 'whenever possible' (Article 13), and Article 25 explicitly states that testing on animals should only occur as a last resort. Yet in practice, these commitments are frequently bypassed. A report[1] published in 2024 by leading scientists and organisations revealed that the last resort requirement isn't always respected in practice. Companies continue to submit animal data on a routine basis, often because such data is perceived as more readily acceptable. Regulators frequently request or accept animal-based studies, even when suitable non-animal methods are available.
The contradictory effects and implications of this approach are evident in the numbers. The scale of animal testing in the EU is staggering. In 2022 alone, over 8.4 million animals were used in scientific procedures across the European Union (EU) and Norway. Of these, more than 1.1 million were used specifically for regulatory testing, including chemical safety assessments.[2] Many of these animals endured moderate to severe suffering. For instance, chemical safety dossiers often include repeated-dose toxicity tests, skin and eye irritation tests on rabbits, and reproductive toxicity tests that use hundreds of animals per chemical.
This reality stands in stark contrast to both the ethical principles and legal goals of REACH, and the situation is worsening. A 2023 review revealed that animal testing under REACH has far exceeded initial projections, with numbers expected to rise further in the coming years (Knight et al. 2023 PMID:37470350). This anticipated increase is partly driven by the potential introduction of new testing requirements, designed to enhance protection of human health and the environment. However, the actual benefit of additional animal testing remains uncertain, and without clear evidence that these new requirements will meaningfully improve safety outcomes, there is a real risk of unnecessarily expanding animal use.
This isn't just an ethical issue, it's also a scientific one. Animal tests are often poor predictors of human outcomes. Numerous studies have demonstrated that non-animal models, including human cell-based assays and computational approaches, can provide more accurate, faster, and cost-effective data. For example, skin sensitisation assessments once relied upon guinea pig and mice tests, but can now be reliably assessed using a combination of cell-based and computational approaches validated by the OECD[3]. Yet, these animal-free methods are still not being utilised to their full potential.
Now is the time to fix this. Nearly two decades after its introduction, REACH is set for a significant revision, offering a critical chance to close this gap between policy and practice. The European Commission has an opportunity to remove regulatory obstacles that slow the adoption of advanced, animal-free safety testing. To truly make animal testing a last resort, not the default, three key reforms should be made: 'No alternative' must truly mean 'no alternative.' Before any animal test is performed, registrants and authorities should publicly document that no equally reliable non-animal method exists. Transparency must be increased.
Animal tests should only be approved if they are scientifically necessary, not just administratively convenient. Too often, testing is driven by regulatory habit rather than safety need.
Ethical and scientific oversight that balances both the necessity and the ethical cost of animal testing must be required. The decision to use live animals must never be taken lightly or hidden behind bureaucratic procedure. The EU has long positioned itself as a global leader in animal welfare and regulatory innovation. But true leadership involves setting high standards and also upholding them. If REACH continues to allow animal testing as a routine fallback, it will undermine both its credibility and its fundamental expression of Europe's broader values and goals. Policymakers now have a chance to align our laws with EU's political agenda and society's technological advancement. Industry, too, stands to benefit from the rapid embrace of non-animal methods that are often faster, cheaper, and more predictive of human outcomes. By shifting the culture around chemical safety testing, we can build a system that protects people, the environment and animals, without compromising our fundamental public health and safety needs.
With REACH under review, it's time to move beyond vague commitments and implement real safeguards to replace animal testing. Let's ensure that the REACH revision reflects not just the best science, but the best of what Europe stands for.
By Dr Giorgia Pallocca and Antigoni Effraimidou, Humane World for Animals.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Roche steps in as Trump aims for 1500% drug price cuts
Roche steps in as Trump aims for 1500% drug price cuts

Euractiv

timea day ago

  • Euractiv

Roche steps in as Trump aims for 1500% drug price cuts

'We're gonna get the drug prices down – not 30% or 40%. No, we're gonna get them down 1,000%, 1,500%,' said the US president. Euractiv is part of the Trust Project Thomas Mangin Euractiv Jul 24, 2025 15:17 2 min. read News Based on facts, either observed and verified directly by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Amid a crusade against overpriced medicine, US President Donald Trump has promised to bring drug prices down by 1,500%. While the world still puzzles over his maths, the industry appears ready to offer solutions. 'We're gonna get the drug prices down – not 30% or 40%, which would be great. Not 50% or 60%. No, we're gonna get them down 1,000%, 600%, 500%, 1,500%,' said the US president at the White House on 22 July 22. 'Numbers that are not even thought to be achievable, because I've used a certain talent that I have,' he added. The pharmaceutical industry remains one of President Trump's primary targets. In his first term, Trump vowed to lower drug prices – but with little effect. A study by the Rand Corporation estimated that in 2024, drug prices in the United States were 2.7 times higher than in the 32 other OECD countries. The U.S. president continues to put pressure on big pharma groups and is pushing them to relocate to the United States, notably by threatening to impose tariffs of up to 200%. Several European companies have announced massive investments across the Atlantic in recent months. On 22 July, AstraZeneca unveiled a $50 billion investment plan in the United States by 2030. In April, Roche announced a similar investment for production as well as research and development in the U.S. 'We hope the U.S. government will see, through all the investments we and other companies are making, that pharmaceutical firms want to produce the medicines needed in the United States, for the United States,' said Schinecker. (bms, aw)

Coordination key to tackling rise in livestock diseases, says WOAH
Coordination key to tackling rise in livestock diseases, says WOAH

Euractiv

timea day ago

  • Euractiv

Coordination key to tackling rise in livestock diseases, says WOAH

Surveillance, early warning systems and cross-border cooperation are essential to combat climate change, trade and pathogens adaptation that are driving a rise in animal diseases in Europe, says Montserrat Arroyo, Deputy Director General of the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH). In recent years, European farmers have faced the emergence of previously unknown animal diseases, such as lumpy skin disease (LSD), and the return of others once eradicated, like foot-and-mouth disease. In Greece, sheep and goat pox has been declared a national emergency, while periodic waves of bird flu and African swine fever have been hitting the continent since 2014. According to Arroyo, the growing frequency of outbreaks requires adapting to a new reality. What follows is an edited transcript. What factors contribute to the emergence of diseases such as LSD in Europe, as seen in France and Italy? In the case of LSD, we don't yet know exactly where it originated. Epidemiological investigations are ongoing. More broadly, the risk of disease incursions is rising due to climate change, trade evolutions, and changes in pathogen dynamics. These three factors are driving the emergence of diseases in places where they did not previously exist. Could you elaborate on how these factors impact animal diseases? For LSD, climate change certainly plays a role. It's a vector-borne disease, primarily transmitted by vectors such as mosquitoes, ticks or flies. Temperature changes can enable these vectors to appear in areas where they were not previously present. In some cases, even extreme winds can transport them from one region to another. What about trade? Other possible origins of these outbreaks include transmission by an infected animal from an affected country or by imported equipment that has not been properly disinfected. We are seeing diseases emerge as a result of shifting consumption patterns. As populations move, their consumption habits and demand for certain products or animals change - and so do the associated risks. Generally, we hope all countries apply the correct trade measures. However, travellers sometimes bring in products from their countries without complying with the sanitary restrictions designed to prevent this. In some countries, we're seeing an increase in illegal trade, which further increases the risks. You also mentioned changes in pathogen dynamics. What does that mean? Diseases evolve and adapt. Take avian influenza, for example: it used to only affect domestic poultry, but it has since evolved and spread to certain wild bird populations. This increases the risk to domestic animals when they come into contact with wildlife. We just need to monitor how pathogens are moving, understand how they affect different species, and try to respond accordingly. We've also seen the emergence of other diseases like foot-and-mouth disease, African swine fever, and bluetongue. Is this part of a broader upward trend? There have always been epidemics. But yes, we can say there has been an increase in outbreaks of diseases that were not previously present in the region. For example, it is the first time LSD has appeared in Continental Europe. Do these outbreaks have a lasting impact on farms, and do they pose a growing threat to the EU's food security? There are two types of impact: a direct one on producers, who are often severely affected, and a broader one on the country, which can be less severe if the disease is quickly contained. Take the example of foot-and-mouth disease in Germany. Fortunately, the impact was minor and well controlled because the disease was quickly identified and contained. But some countries are unable to respond as quickly. This is sometimes because they do not have access to vaccines or because their veterinary services are not sufficiently supported. In Europe, resilience is quite good. What does the WOAH recommend for managing disease outbreaks? The only way to prevent a costly outbreak is to invest in veterinary services. In addition, we recommend establishing strong surveillance and early warning systems. It's also important to strengthen biosecurity, implement vector control measures, and carry out vaccination. And, of course, coordination between countries is essential. Is the EU's regionalist approach, which focuses on affected regions rather than entire countries, a good method? The regionalisation approach is an excellent tool. It can even be used to open markets when only half of a country is free of a particular disease. The EU did not apply this measure to Brazil when it blocked poultry and meat exports to the bloc due to bird flu. What is your view on this? Europe has very strict regulations on regionalisation. These apply to third countries but are based on the EU's risk assessment and the information those countries provide. (adm, de)

Ireland publishes National Drugs Strategy as ministers battle rising cocaine use
Ireland publishes National Drugs Strategy as ministers battle rising cocaine use

Euractiv

time2 days ago

  • Euractiv

Ireland publishes National Drugs Strategy as ministers battle rising cocaine use

Dublin - Ireland's health ministers have released an independent evaluation of the country's National Drugs Strategy (NDS), 'Reducing Harm, Supporting Recovery 2017–2025', highlighting progress in harm reduction and international alignment, while also identifying areas for structural reform. The report, commissioned by the Department of Health and conducted by Grant Thornton, assesses the strategy across four key domains: impact, governance, performance, and coherence with international policy frameworks. It fulfils a commitment made in the Programme for Government and arrives as policymakers prepare to draft a successor strategy by the end of 2025. The evaluation finds that the NDS has made 'notable progress in advancing a health-led approach,' particularly through the expansion of harm reduction measures such as naloxone distribution, needle exchange programmes, and drug-checking services. On governance, the report cites the establishment of strategic implementation groups and enhanced interagency collaboration at the local level as key achievements. These developments, it notes, have enabled 'more responsive and context-sensitive service delivery.' Performance metrics show improved data collection and monitoring. Shifting trends Cocaine emerged as the most common primary drug reported in treatment cases in 2024, underscoring a shift in Ireland's drug use profile. Ireland's latest drug use figures, published in 2025 by the Health Research Board, reveal a shifting landscape in substance use, with cannabis and cocaine remaining the most prevalent illicit drugs. Based on data from the 'Healthy Ireland Survey 2023', 7.8% of adults reported using cannabis in the past year, while cocaine use rose to 4.4%, particularly among those aged 25–34. Sedative and tranquilliser use stood at 2.5%, with higher rates among women and older adults. The report also highlights a rise in polydrug use and a strong correlation between drug use and other risk behaviours, including tobacco and alcohol consumption. EU drug strategy alignment Internationally, the strategy is deemed well-aligned with the EU Drugs Strategy and Action Plan 2021–2025, with Ireland's contributions to early warning systems and multilateral research initiatives receiving particular praise. However, the review also identifies persistent challenges, including fragmented delivery of prevention and early intervention services, and a need for alternatives to coercive sanctions. It outlines 10 strategic recommendations to guide the next phase of policy development. Minister for Health Jennifer Carroll MacNeill welcomed the report's focus on equity and access, noting alignment with ongoing Sláintecare reforms. 'The establishment of new HSE health regions presents a valuable opportunity to tailor drug treatment services to population needs and to ensure that both existing and new funding is allocated effectively and transparently,' she said. Carroll MacNeill also highlighted the importance of cross-border and EU collaboration: 'The upcoming Irish Presidency of the EU offers a unique opportunity to foster greater collaboration between member states, the EU Drugs Agency, and civil society organisations.' She added, 'Together, we can better address the health and preparedness challenges posed by an evolving and dynamic drugs market.' Minister for Public Health, Wellbeing and the National Drugs Strategy, Jennifer Murnane O'Connor reaffirmed her commitment to a health-led approach, including the proposed health diversion scheme. She welcomed 'the strong endorsement in the evaluation of the health-led response to drug use, including the proposed health diversion scheme for people found in possession of drugs for personal use. I am determined that the scheme will commence as soon as possible, in line with the commitments in the Programme for Government.' Next steps Murnane O'Connor announced the formation of a steering group to draft the next strategy. 'It is my ambition that the successor national drugs strategy will further strengthen the health-led approach to drug use by addressing the health and social needs of people who use drugs, reducing the harms for individuals, families and communities associated with drugs, and supporting recovery from drug addiction,' she said. The review's 10 recommendations include enhancing culturally sensitive services, increasing community engagement, aligning service delivery with regional needs, and investing in monitoring and research systems. It also calls for stronger integration of alcohol treatment services and continued development of alternatives to criminal sanctions. The evaluation follows the 2024 report of the Citizens' Assembly on Drug Use, which issued 36 recommendations spanning prevention, harm reduction, treatment, and recovery. These remain under active consideration by the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Drug Use and are expected to shape the forthcoming strategy. The EU Drugs Strategy 2021–2025 set out a robust, health-oriented framework to tackle drug-related issues across member states, balancing supply reduction with demand-side interventions. Central to the strategy has been harm reduction, international cooperation, and evidence-based policymaking, underpinned by commitments to human rights, gender equality, and public health. Its strategic goals have included enhancing security, expanding access to treatment, and reinforcing governance structures. The strategy also aligns with UN conventions and supports multilateral engagement. Its foremost priority is the disruption and dismantling of high-risk organised crime groups linked to drug trafficking, particularly those operating within or targeting the EU, and addressing their connections to broader security threats. By Brian Maguire

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store