Ruling on PETA complaint a victory for animals used in EU chemical tests

December 12, 2014

London - In a landmark decision with the potential to save millions of animals from suffering and death in laboratory experiments, the European Ombudsman has determined that the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) is not fully applying its authority to minimize animal experiments, as required by law, and should begin to do so.

This judgment comes two years after PETA filed a complaint with the European Ombudsman alleging that ECHA does not correctly apply the provisions of the Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals Regulation (REACH) concerning animal testing requirements and thereby fails to fulfill its mandated responsibilities.

"Today's ruling has enormous implications for preventing the suffering of millions of animals", says PETA Head of Science Dr Gilly Stoddart. "REACH is unprecedented in its impact on animals. ECHA will now be compelled to fulfill its obligation to ensure that animal use under REACH is truly minimized."

The REACH Regulation is clear that animal tests must be avoided whenever possible. However, ECHA's 2011 report, The Use of Alternatives to Testing on Animals for the REACH Regulation, showed that tens of thousands of animals were used in tests that could have been avoided. These tests included 135 skin-irritation studies conducted after a nonanimal replacement had been validated and approved for use under REACH. Just as worrisome, 107 studies were conducted without prior submission and approval of a testing proposal.

The European Ombudsman's decision directs ECHA to inform Member States of all possible instances of non-compliance - not just proven violations.

The Ombudsman further found that ECHA's refusal to ensure that dossiers comply with the principle of using animals only as a last resort is akin to amending REACH informally without involvement of the European Commission. The Ombudsman has issued clear direction for ECHA to request information from registrants to demonstrate compliance when required.

It is critical that ECHA immediately incorporate the Ombudsman's suggestions and make the necessary changes to fully act within the letter and the spirit of the law and, above all, ensure that animal testing is conducted only as a last resort.

Copies of PETA's complaint and related correspondence are available upon request. The Ombudsman's decision can be found here. For more information, please visit

Tasgola Bruner 404-907-4172;

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals

Related Animal Testing Articles from Brightsurf:

Archive of animal migration in the Arctic
A global archive with movement data collected across three decades logs changes in the behaviour of Arctic animals

An alternative to animal experiments
Researchers of the Technical University of Munich (TUM) have cultured so-called intestinal organoids from human intestinal tissue, which is a common byproduct when performing bowel surgery.

The Lancet Respiratory Medicine: Rapid bedside testing is faster than standard centralised PCR testing for COVID-19, and may improve infection control in hospital
An interventional study tracking SARS-CoV-2 testing on admission to a UK hospital finds that the wait for results was just 1.7 hours using point-of-care testing (POCT) close to the patient's bedside, compared with 21.3 hours using the standard process of PCR testing in a centralised lab within the hospital.

SARS-CoV-2: New insights on antibody testing and RNA testing
Two types of tests are used to track SARS-CoV-2. Reverse transcriptase PCR (rt-PCR) tests for current infection.

Designing animal studies to improve research reproducibility and reduce animal use
At the invitation of the University of Bern, international experts worked out new recommendations for the design of animal studies.

Pea instead of soy in animal feed
By far the largest proportion of soybeans grown worldwide is used for animal feed.

Replacing animal testing with synthetic cell scaffolds
Electrospun synthetic cell scaffolds are not only more consistent than animal cells for cancer research, they hold the potential to replace animal testing.

Researchers say animal-like embryos preceded animal appearance
Animals evolved from single-celled ancestors before diversifying into 30-40 distinct anatomical designs.

Animal embryos evolved before animals
A new study by an international team of researchers, led by scientists from the University of Bristol and Nanjing Institute of Geology and Palaeontology, has discovered that animal-like embryos evolved long before the first animals appear in the fossil record.

Scientists invent animal-free testing of lethal neurotoxins
Animal testing will no longer be required to assess a group of deadly neurotoxins, thanks to University of Queensland-led research.

Read More: Animal Testing News and Animal Testing Current Events is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to