Tweet
SharePress Statement: Following intervention by the PETA Science Consortium International e.V., ECHA Board of Appeals annuls decision by ECHA requiring BASF to conduct a prenatal developmental toxicity study using rats or rabbits (Case A-013-2016)
December 12, 2017
We welcome the ruling from the ECHA Board of Appeal to annul a decision by ECHA requiring BASF Personal Care and Nutrition GmbH to conduct a prenatal developmental toxicity study using rats or rabbits, which was made following an intervention by the PETA Science Consortium International. For now, the ruling saves hundreds of animals, including pregnant females and their unborn offspring, from being force-fed high concentrations of a cosmetics ingredient. Going forward, registrants would be well advised to use only non-animal approaches to the hazard assessment of cosmetics ingredients, and where ECHA has serious hazard concerns, these should be raised with the relevant member states in accordance with the law.
The PETA Science Consortium International intervened in this case, pointing out that ECHA’s justification for the required test was neither ethical nor legally robust. The EU Court of Justice clarified last year that relying on new data derived from tests on animals can trigger the cosmetics marketing ban. Similarly, following a complaint filed by PETA UK, the European Ombudsman advised that animal-testing data generated for the purpose of REACH cannot necessarily be relied upon for the safety assessment report required under the Cosmetics Regulation. Consequently, by barring the substance from the EU market, the requested test would serve no real purpose in protecting humans.
REACH applies without prejudice to the animal testing bans laid out in the Cosmetics Regulation. The Board has agreed with the Science Consortium, correctly recognising that ECHA has a duty to take into account the implications of the Cosmetics Regulation in its administration of REACH.
Press Statement: ECHA Board of Appeal agrees with the PETA Science Consortium International e.V. in ruling that may save 1,300 animals
June 10, 2015
In another blow to the manner in which the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) has failed to enforce the requirement that testing on animals shall be undertaken only as a last resort, the Agency’s Board of Appeal today annulled a decision by ECHA that required CINIC CHEMICALS EUROPE, Sàrl to conduct an extended one generation reproductive toxicity study (EOGRTS). ECHA has refused to consider new information and updates to the registrant’s dossier after a self-imposed deadline.
The PETA Science Consortium International e.V., intervened in this case and called for changes to ECHA’s strict administrative processes to ensure that all data are assessed prior to requiring the animal test. In this precedent-setting case, the Board’s decision requires the Agency to reopen the case, which should result in sparing approximately 1300 animals from being fed the substance during pregnancy or as newborns before being killed and dissected. It could also prevent tens of thousands of other animals from being used in similarly avoidable tests.
By requiring ECHA to assess new information, the Board has ensured that all relevant data will be considered prior to requiring the test. This critical change to ECHA’s restrictive administrative processes will help ensure that registrants test on animals only as a last resort, as required by law.