Report Shows Progress on Chemical Tests – But Animals Are Still Paying the Price
The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) has released its latest report on the use of alternatives to animal testing under the REACH regulation. Published every three years, the report is meant to track progress towards reducing and replacing the use of animals in chemical safety testing.
There are signs of progress, but the reality is that animals are still suffering in laboratories across the UK and Europe, even when suitable non-animal methods exist.
Under REACH, animals are only supposed to be used in tests as a last resort and when no other options are available. Yet the report shows that this is not always happening in practice.
Animals Should Never Be Used for Experiments
One of the clearest examples is acute fish toxicity testing.
Fish continue to be subjected to this test in which they are exposed to a chemical, deprived of food, and monitored for 96 hours as they become increasingly unwell. At the end of the test, the number of deaths is counted to determine how toxic the substance is.
These tests persist despite the availability of non‑animal methods, such as tests using fish cells and computational approaches, which can provide similar or more relevant information without causing suffering. However, very few companies are choosing to use these methods.
In fact, when submitting data to regulators, acute fish toxicity is mostly addressed using data from the fish test, while non‑animal approaches are used far less frequently. Even when better science exists, it’s not being implemented.
Why Are Experiments on Animals Still the Default?
A major barrier is a lack of confidence in non‑animal methods. Companies often worry that regulators may not accept newer approaches, so they fall back on tests on animals because they appear to be the easiest option for regulatory approval.
This creates a vicious cycle. Non‑animal methods are developed, scientifically validated, and recognised by regulatory bodies, yet they can remain underused in real-world decision-making.
While the report calls for ‘stronger collaboration and dialogue’, enforcing the rule that animal testing only be used as a true last resort requires more than discussion.
The System Must Change
If the EU is serious about ending animal testing for chemical safety assessments, the system needs to change.
At present, there is no full revision of the REACH regulation planned. That means updating the REACH Annexes that specify which tests are required is the most effective way to drive progress.
By removing animal test requirements and allowing a broader range of non‑animal approaches, regulators can help ensure that science is used to its full potential.
Without these changes, animal tests will continue to be the default, even when avoidable.
Non‑Animal Methods Must Become the New Normal
The EU has committed to phasing out animal testing for chemical safety assessments. But commitments alone are not enough.
To truly end the use of animals in laboratories, non‑animal methods must become the default – not the exception. That means clearer rules, faster updates to regulations, a system that actively encourages innovative, humane science, and strong deterrents for using animal tests when non-animal methods are available.
Animals should never suffer in laboratories, especially when other options already exist. It’s time to close the gap between policy and practice – and ensure that the promise to end animal testing becomes a reality.
Tell the EU to modernise REACH!
Sign our open letter calling on EU leaders to modernise REACH and help end chemical experiments for good:
Sign the Open Letter
Help Animals in 2026: Renew Your PETA Membership!
Donate Now
Read More
Dog Breeder and Former Crufts Winner Sentenced for Animal Welfare Offences
Report Shows Progress on Chemical Tests – But Animals Are Still Paying the Price
