Home banner
A-Z Index

Quick way to the find the information that you need...

More button
Register with FRAME

Although you do not need to register, any information you provide will be confidential and used only by FRAME to improve the website

Register button
Account Login
Forgot password?

The Journal


Alternatives to Laboratory Animals - ATLA

Download latest issue button Download back issues button Subscribe to ATLA
Contact Us

Tel icon

Tel: +44 (0)115 9584740

Tel icon

Fax: +44 (0)115 9503570

Make an Enquiry

Brueghel’s Two Monkeys

Ingrid E. Newkirk

Progress in finding alternatives to animal tests continues to be painfully slow, and pain is certainly the operative word for animals involved in the tests. US government agencies are not simply being slow, they are not moving forward at all. For example, the US Environmental Protection Agency has been directed by Congress to spend a small amount of its budget on non-animal test method development, yet it has not done so, and the in vivo percutaneous absorption test continues to be used, despite the existence of an approved non-animal method. A movement is building that may compel industry to stop hiding behind the regulators and take action. There are excellent reasons to stop fighting such advances. For ethical, practical, business and other reasons, it is time to enthusiastically embrace an effective approach to finding, advocating and adopting non-animal test methods.