Alternatives to Animal Testing: A Review of Trends and Perspectives

Aug 1, 2009 | Contact Author | By: Anna Oborska, PhD, Polish Association of Cosmetics and Home Care Products Producers
Your message has been sent.
(click to close)
Contact the Author
Save
This item has been saved to your library.
View My Library
(click to close)
Save to My Library
Title: Alternatives to Animal Testing: A Review of Trends and Perspectives
ECVAMx SCCPx testingx animal alternativesx toxicityx irritationx corrosionx sensitizationx
  • Article
  • Media
  • Keywords/Abstract

Keywords: ECVAM | SCCP | testing | animal alternatives | toxicity | irritation | corrosion | sensitization

Abstract: Alternative test methods have the potential to reduce animal testing; however, the extent to which in vitro methods can be replaced is questionable. This article summarizes validated alternatives to test the safety of cosmetic ingredients. It also illustrates how great a challenge it is to devise a proper alternative method.

Excerpt Only This is a shortened version or summary of the article you requested. To view the complete article, please log in or create an account. Registration is Free!

For years, progress has been made in developing alternatives to animal testing as society has internationally sought methods to that end. Regulatory mandates have played a key role as well; the 7th Amendment to the Cosmetic Directive (2003/15/EC) was adopted by European Union (EU) institutions in 2003 and imposes strict deadlines to abolish in vivo animal studies for cosmetic ingredient testing. The other crucial regulation pressing for alternative methods is REACH, which was adopted by the European Council and the European Parliament in December 2006. It is worth mentioning that the ban on the testing of chemicals on animals refers strictly to compliance with requirements of the Cosmetic Directive.

To facilitate the development of non-animal tests for the EU, the European Center for Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM) was established in 1991. Scientific advice for the validation process is subsequently provided by experts from all member states in ECVAM’s Scientific Advisory Committee (ESAC). All available methods are considered during the validation process, whereby their reliability and relevance are established. The general rules to validate an alternative method have been agreed upon at an international level and this complex process consists of several stages.1 Alternative test methods have the potential to reduce animal testing; however, it is questionable as to what extent in vitro methods can be replaced since some testing requires the involvement of a whole organism. This article summarizes validated alternatives to test the safety of cosmetic ingredients. It also illustrates how great a challenge it is to devise a proper alternative method.

Excerpt Only This is a shortened version or summary of the article you requested. To view the complete article, please log in or create an account. Registration is Free!

 

Close

Table 1. Existing alternative methods and proposed methods

 Table 1. Existing alternative methods and proposed methods 

Figure 1. Schematic of the validation process

 Figure 1. Schematic of the validation process

Oborska Animal Testing footnotes

 a EpiSkin is a registered trademark of SkinEthic.

b EpiDerm is a registered trademark of MatTek.

Next image >

 
 

Close

It's Free...

Register or Log in to get full access to this content

Registration includes:

  • Access to all premium content
  • One click ingredient sample requests
  • Save articles in the My Library tool

Create an Account or Log In