The OECD health effects test guidelines: A challenge to the sincerity of commitment to the three Rs

Alternatives to Laboratory Animals

Volumn 34, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 105-108

  Balls, Michael ^a   Combes, Robert D ^a  

^a RUSSELL AND BURCH HOUSE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL TESTING ALTERNATIVE; ANIMAL TESTING REDUCTION; ANIMAL TESTING REFINEMENT; ANIMAL TESTING REPLACEMENT; ANIMAL USE; ANIMAL WELFARE; NONHUMAN; NOTE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TOXICITY TESTING;

ANIMALIA;

EID: 33644857056     PISSN: 02611929     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/026119290603400106     Document Type: Note

References (15)

1. Worth, A.P. & Balls, M., eds (2002). Alternative (non-animal) methods for chemicals testing: current status and future prospects. A report prepared by ECVAM and the ECVAM Working Group on Chemicals. ATLA 30, Suppl. 1, 1-125.
2. Anon. (2001). White Paper on a Strategy for a Future Chemicals Policy, COM(2001) 88 final. Website http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/com/wpr/2001/ com2001_0088en01.pdf (Accessed 29.8.04).
3. European Commission (2003). Consultation Documents Volumes I-VII Concerning the Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals (REACH). Website http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/chemicals/whitepaper.htm (Accessed 12.11.03).
4. Combes, R.D., Gaunt, I. & Balls, M. (2004). A scientific and animal welfare assessment of the OECD Health Effects Test Guidelines for the safety testing of chemicals under the European Union REACH system. ATLA 32, 163-208.
5. Balls, M. & Combes, R. (2005). The need for a formal invalidation process for animal and non-animal tests. ATLA 33, 299-308.
6. Auletta, A. (2006). An assessment of some recommendations made concerning the OECD Health Effects Test Guidelines. ATLA 34, 109-110.
7. Doe, J., Lewis, R.W. & Botham, P.A. (2006). Comments on A scientific and animal welfare assessment of the OECD Health Effects Test Guidelines for the safety testing of chemicals under the European Union REACH system. ATLA 34, 111-114.
8. Phillips, B. (2006). OECD Test Guidelines are tools, not blueprints, for chemical safety assessment. ATLA 34, 115-117.
9. The ICAPO member organisations include: the Animal Protection Institute, Animal Alliance of Canada, British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection, Doris Day Animal League, Eurogroup for Animal Welfare, European Coalition to End Animal Experiments, the Humane Society of the United States, Japan Antivivisection Association, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, and Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine.
10. Wagner, D. (2005). Test Guidelines Programme - Issues Paper: Refocus of the Test Guidelines Programme, 17th Meeting of the Working Group of National Co-ordinators of the Test Guidelines Programme (WNT), 16 March 2005. ENV/JM/TG(2005)13, 23pp. Paris, France: OECD.
11. AnOn. (2006). The OECD Guidelines. Paris, France: OECD. Website http://www.oecd.org/about/0,2337,en_ 2649_34377_1_1_1_1_1,00.html (Accessed 9.2.06)
12. Anon. (2000). Guidance Document on the Recognition, Assessment, and Use of Clinical Signs as Humane End-points for Experimental Animals Used in Safety Evaluation. ENV/JM/MONO(2000)7, 39pp. Paris, France: OECD
13. Anon. (1986). Council Directive of 24 November 1986 on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States regarding the protection of animals used for experimental and other scientific purposes. Official Journal of the European Communities L358, 1-29.
14. Combes, R. (2005). "Europe Goes Alternative" - What's All the Fuss About? ATLA 33, 549-552.
15. Anon. (2005). Reducing Animal Testing: Commission Agrees Partnership with Industry. Website europa.eu. int/comm/enterprise/events/animal_tests/index_en. htm (Accessed 08.11.05).