Food for thought... on the economics of animal testing.

“Money makes the world go around.” We all know the truth in this line from the movie “Cabaret”, but in the field of alternative methods we talk about ethics, scientific progress, politics, animal welfare or consumer and environmental safety but rarely about money. In this series of articles, we have occasionally touched on issues that are difficult to separate from economic aspects. Most obviously, the article on globalisation (Bottini et al., 2007) showed the resonance between a major economic trend and recent developments in the field of alternative methods. Most recently, the articles on cosmetics and food safety testing in this series included aspects of regulation and economic impact (Hartung, 2008b; Hartung and Koeter, 2008). last but not least, the article on animal experimentation (Hartung, 2008a) touched on the economic implications of animal testing. Now, we would like to expand on the economic forces influencing the field of alternative methods. This requires a review of the major industries regulated by animal testing, differences between the nations, functions of animal testing in the economic cycle, alternative methods as a market, and costs of limitations of current practices and economic forces, which might force change. Alfred A. Knopf stated “An economist is a man who states the obvious in terms of the incomprehensible” and John Kenneth Galbraith said “Economics is extremely useful as a form of employment for economists”. By combining our scientific and legal/economical expertise, the authors aim to formulate some considerations that are not completely obvious and to express them comprehensibly. As always, we encourage comments and replies to see whether this so far largely neglected topic delivers helpful insights.

[1]  Nassim Nicholas Taleb,et al.  The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable , 2007 .

[2]  J. Jeyaratnam Acute pesticide poisoning: a major global health problem. , 1990, World health statistics quarterly. Rapport trimestriel de statistiques sanitaires mondiales.

[3]  Thomas Hartung,et al.  Food for thought ... on the evolution of toxicology and the phasing out of animal testing. , 2008, ALTEX.

[4]  Manfred Fleischer,et al.  Testing Costs and Testing Capacity According to the REACH Requirements - Results of a Survey of Independent and Corporate GLP Laboratories in the EU and Switzerland , 2007 .

[5]  F. Lichtenberg The Impact of New Drug Launches on Longevity: Evidence from Longitudinal, Disease-Level Data from 52 Countries, 1982–2001 , 2003, International Journal of Health Care Finance and Economics.

[6]  G. Langley,et al.  Estimates for Worldwide Laboratory Animal Use in 2005 , 2008 .

[7]  T Seidle,et al.  The development of new concepts for assessing reproductive toxicity applicable to large scale toxicological programmes. , 2007, Current pharmaceutical design.

[8]  Horst Spielmann,et al.  Animal testing and alternative approaches for the human health risk assessment under the proposed new European chemicals regulation , 2004, Archives of Toxicology.

[9]  Giandomenico Majone,et al.  The Precautionary Principle and its Policy Implications , 2002 .

[10]  F. Lichtenberg The effect of access restrictions on the vintage of drugs used by Medicaid enrollees. , 2005, The American journal of managed care.

[11]  D. Vogel Trading Up: Consumer and Environmental Regulation in a Global Economy , 1997 .

[12]  Thomas Hartung,et al.  Food for thought ... on alternative methods for cosmetics safety testing. , 2008, ALTEX.

[13]  T. Hartung,et al.  Food for thought ... On food safety testing. , 2008, ALTEX.

[14]  I. Kola,et al.  Can the pharmaceutical industry reduce attrition rates? , 2004, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[15]  M. Litchfield Estimates of Acute Pesticide Poisoning in Agricultural Workers in Less Developed Countries , 2005, Toxicological reviews.

[16]  Sebastian Hoffmann,et al.  Diagnosis: toxic!--trying to apply approaches of clinical diagnostics and prevalence in toxicology considerations. , 2005, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[17]  Bill Durodié,et al.  The True Cost of Precautionary Chemicals Regulation , 2003, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[18]  M. Porter,et al.  The Competitive Advantage of Nations. , 1990 .

[19]  Nicolas Treich,et al.  Decision-Making Under Scientific Uncertainty: The Economics of the Precautionary Principle , 2003 .

[20]  T Hartung,et al.  Toward an evidence-based toxicology , 2006, Human & experimental toxicology.

[21]  Le monde diplomatique,et al.  Atlas der Globalisierung , 2003 .

[22]  Baruch Fischhoff,et al.  Precautionary principles: general definitions and specific applications to genetically modified organisms , 2002 .

[23]  Richard N. Cooper,et al.  Trading up: Consumer and Environmental Regulation in a Global Economy , 1995 .

[24]  Thomas Hartung,et al.  Food for thought ... on globalisation of alternative methods. , 2007, ALTEX.

[25]  Thomas Hartung,et al.  The dawning of a new age of toxicology. , 2008, ALTEX.

[26]  Bernd Hansjürgens,et al.  Chemicals Regulation and the Porter Hypothesis - a Critical Review of the New European Chemical Regulation , 2005 .

[27]  Thomas Hartung,et al.  Food for thought... on animal tests. , 2008, ALTEX.

[28]  Sharon Munn,et al.  Assessment of additional testing needs under REACH Effects of (Q)SARS, risk based testing and voluntary industry initiatives , 2003 .