AR-News: Email Dept of Health
rumsiki at netvision.net.il
Mon May 3 20:55:35 EDT 2004
Courtesy of http://www.dlrm.org/
Link between illnesses and chemicals and the flawed method of testing
chemicals (animal testing).
1. There is a significant rise in cancer starting shortly after World War 2
and persisting into the 1990s.
2. The death rate due to all cancer, except lung cancer, in people between
ages 40 and 45 years, increased six-fold between 1950 and 1980, lung cancer
3. Trends as impressive as these are found, for example, in allergies
(asthma) especially in children, and dementia (Alzheimer¹s, Parkinson¹s,
multiple sclerosis), which is increasingly afflicting people below their
fifties. Autism in children soars at a breath-taking rate: according to
official US data, the number of affected children increased ten-fold over
the past 10 years and amounts to 120,000 in 2002 in this country (UK).
4. Since World War 2, some 80,000 man-made chemical substances, for various
purposes, were brought on the market in varying quantities of up to 100,000
tonnes a year. These chemicals are used for outdoor and domestic purposes,
even finding their way onto our tables in the form of food additives and
pesticides. This suggests a link between the adverse health trends and the
concomitant introduction of chemicals.
5.According to the European Commission (EC), only 2% of these chemicals have
been assessed for the risk they may cause¹ to rodents! In 2003, the EC
issued the REACH project (Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation of
Chemicals) in which we should know by 2020 the risk of the 100,000
chemicals¹ in rodents. Ninety two million animals would be involved.
6. Non-animal testing is reliable and very fast. They provide definitive
results within hours, or days at most, valid for humans, while animal
experimentation lasts for months and years and yield results valid for
7. Industrial parties seem uninterested in correctly testing chemicals. If
they have their way we will have dangerous products infiltrating our homes
and our food just because they were declared safe by flawed (animal) tests.
Please write to the Department of Health and D.E.F.R.A in the UK asking them
to support non-animal testing of chemicals.
dhmail at doh.gsi.gov.uk, Chemicals.Strategy at defra.gsi.gov.uk
Dear Department of Health and Chemical Strategy at DEFRA,
I am writing about scientific toxicity assessment of chemicals in the REACH
(Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals) programme.
Europeans live surrounded by over 100,000 chemicals, 98% of which have never
been tested for their effects on our health or the environment. The European
Commission is right in deciding that these products must be assessed.
However many doctors and organisations, such as Doctors and Lawyers for
Responsible Medicine (DLRM), challenge the EC's projected use of traditional
toxicology methods in such assessments, since these would rely on
animal-based tests, which have been conclusively proved to be unreliable for
human medical research.
Examination of recent health data statistics prove that we are inadvertently
exposed, inside and outside our homes, to a full-blown chemical war which
claims hundreds of thousands of innocent victims yearly in the EU. The board
of Alliance for Responsible Science (AFRS), in which DLRM participates, has
worked out a Science Based Toxicology programme (SBT) for reliable toxic
risk assessment which is valid for humans and enable us to forecast long
The methods proposed are derived from those of modern biology (DNA,chips,
'reporter' genes etc). They are fast, allowing high throughput of screening
of chemicals, can be easily robotized, and are cost-effective compared with
DLRM is campaigning for the adoption of this programme by the EC and EU.
DLRM believe it could halve the cancer mortality rate over the next five
years, and would address the wide variety of side effects which have been
tested by invalid methods.
The DLRM programme offers significant health benefits and would consequently
free up tax-payers money in the NHS fund.
I would be grateful if both DEFRA and the Department of Health would
consider funding this exciting programme - the website of DLRM is
Thank you in advance for your help and I look forward to hearing from you
Animal experiments have:
a 63% failure rate when detecting human carcinogens
a 75-95% failure rate for detecting drug side effects
a 70% failure rate for detecting drugs which cause birth defects
Success rates lower than those achieved by uneducated guesswork.
This is not science!!
Recommended website: The Absurdity of vivisection
Information on animal research available free by EMail from
vivisectionkills at hotmail.com
Express yourself with cool new emoticons http://www.msn.co.uk/specials/myemo
the wild, cruel beast is not behind the bars of the cage. he is in front of it - axel munthe
"Never doubt that a small group of dedicated citizens can change the world.
Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the AR-News