A critique of the EC’s expert (draft) reports on the status of alternatives for cosmetics testing to meet the 2013 deadline

Consensus report on the future of animal-free systemic toxicity testing

“…Alternative in vitro methods have been developed for all toxicological questions, including even the most complex fields, ranging from developmental neurotoxicity (DNt) to xenobiotic metabolism (Adler et al, 2011;Basketter et al, 2012;leist et al, 2012a, 2008bvan thriel et al, 2012;Smirnova et al, 2014;taylor et al, 2011). Many of these methods should be formally validated for immediate use, or they could form the basis for accelerated further development.…”

A roadmap for the development of alternative (non-animal) methods for systemic toxicity testing

“…that the date of 2013 for animal replacement is still possible (Balls and Clothier, 2010;Spielmann, 2010;Taylor et al, 2011). Taylor and Casalegno, in particular, claim that several alternative methods are available where the percentage of prediction is above 80% (Carfi et al, 2007;Duff et al, 2002;Huang et al, 2009;Inoue et al, 2007;Langezaal et al, 2002;Pessina et al, 2001).…”

Discrimination of skin sensitizers from non‐sensitizers by interleukin‐1α and interleukin‐6 production on cultured human keratinocytes

“…However, in vivo assays using animal models are limited in their use, and can be ethically problematic. In addition, legislative changes in the EU, like the Registration Evaluation Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) regulation, banned toxicity testing of cosmetic ingredients using animals (Taylor et al, 2011). Thus, the development of novel alternative testing methods to identify the sensitizing potential of chemicals is needed to replace animal experiments.…”