Animal-free science: futuristic dream or soon reality?

Back in 2010, European lawmakers agreed to contribute to the goal of eliminating the practice of using animals in science and promoting alternative methods, yet animal welfare activists remain disappointed at the little progress that has been achieved throughout the years. EURACTIV has published a series of articles that take a closer look at the current legislation surrounding animal testing in the EU and what the future holds for new initiatives throughout the union. Caliber.Az reprints one of them.

"Many questions about how to phase out animal testing and promote alternative methods risk being unanswered by the time the current legislative term expires in spring 2024.

The past four years offered several opportunities for getting closer to the fulfillment of the EU lawmakers’ commitment to totally replacing animal use in science – which dates back to 2010.

But in reality, little has changed, with continuing delays in presenting the overhauling of the EU’s framework for approving chemicals and the failure to approve the new bloc’s pharmaceutical rules before the end of the mandate.
Animal welfare should be explicitly mentioned in the title of a Commissioner in the next legislative mandate to make it a priority of the next EU executive and avoid the risks of having more animal testing in Europe, according to Green MEP Tilly Metz.

According to her, having animal welfare rules that are more progressive than those in other parts of the world is not enough if legislative initiatives are not accompanied by a roadmap with concrete targets.

'We clearly need a person who puts [animal welfare] on the next mandate’s agenda', the Luxemburgish lawmaker told EURACTIV in an interview.

Animal welfare is currently one of the competencies in the portfolio of the Health Commissioner held by Cypriot Stella Kyriakides but is not mentioned in her title, which is Commissioner for health and food safety.

In the current mandate, the topic has involved other Commission services, such as agriculture [DG AGRI] with the revision of animal welfare rules in livestock farming, as well as the environmental one [DG ENV] with the overhauling of the EU’s framework for chemicals – which include provisions on testing products on animals.

'I want [animal welfare] explicitly in the title as it could allow the next Commissioner a transversal approach including different sectors. That is not nothing', she stressed.

REACH revision still not in reach

Making animal welfare a political priority is essential for the Green MEP as some ongoing legislative revisions such as the forthcoming changes to the registration, evaluation, authorisation and restriction of chemicals – also known as REACH regulation – carry the risks of increasing the number of animal testing.

'This is something I’m really afraid of because millions of animals are still suffering yearly in laboratories', she said.

The REACH revision was initially penciled in for the end of 2022 but has been postponed indefinitely since then, with some campaigners believing it will never see the light of day.

Despite the risks, Metz is worried that not presenting the revision in this mandate could make the protection of animal rights even more complicated, considering the recent political trends ahead of the EU elections.

'The risk of conservatives or even far-right parties having more power in the next Parliament is the risk of more populistic short-term objectives which are not in the sense of more animal welfare or more animal rights', she said.

Animal testing: the test for the next Commission

The EU’s legislation on animal testing is one of the most progressive in the world as, since 1986, the bloc has been providing specific rules for protecting animals used for scientific purposes.

The ambition of a total replacement of animal use in science was set up in an EU directive in 2010, promoting at the same time the development of non-animal approaches to tests and clinical trials.

At least on paper.

'The directive was now nearly 14 years ago, and where are we? Really nowhere', said the Green MEP, referring to the fact that animals are still required to be used systematically for testing chemicals and in clinical trials as the current rules have not excluded testing on animals as a last resort.

According to the Commission figures, animals are still involved in roughly 20% of regulatory procedures necessary for the safety assessment of products in Europe.

For Metz, the biggest flaw of the existing directive is the lack of strategy for transitioning to non-animal methods, even though animal testing 'contributes little in understanding today’s human diseases or human body' compared to the past.

'In certain areas like breast cancer, for example, we are stuck because we stick to animal testing', she said.

'But I could say the same for Alzheimer’s disease. Mice don’t develop Alzheimer’s, so we must implement the disease. And our life, our lifestyle, is much more complicated than that of rats and mice', she continued.

‘People don’t know about NAMs’

For Metz, promoting non-animal approaches, which include all test methodologies that do not involve new in vivo testing, 'could be a real game changer'.

'But let’s be honest, it is more in the tradition of the researchers to use animal testing', she said, adding that changes in the mindset of scientists and their training and education are needed.

'We have to tell the people that NAMs exist, but we don’t even talk enough about what we are doing inside the European Union', she stressed.

In April 2022, the Commission’s Joint Research Centre [JRC] published a status report reviewing all advanced non-animal models used extensively for basic and applied research.

The Green MEP does not ask for a ban on animal testing overnight. 'I’m very realistic about it, we still somehow need animal testing in some sectors'.

'What I want to clear is the phasing out process where we analyse how we could progressively replace animal testing with NAMs', she concluded".