DuPont and Honeywell Accused of Unnecessary Animal Cruelty

From Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine

Monday, March 25, 2002

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- DuPont and Honeywell Accused of Unnecessary Animal
Cruelty

Doctors and Animal Protectionists Charge Companies of Violating EPA Agreement
with Excessive Animal Poisoning Tests

Washington, D.C.A coalition of health, animal protection, and environmental
organizations is accusing DuPont and Honeywell of unnecessary cruelty for
planning to poison more than 1,000 animals in tests with cyclohexanol, a
chemical used in nylon, plastic, and paint manufacturing. Long suspected of
causing reproductive and other serious health problems, the toxic substance
has already has undergone extensive tests. The newly proposed experiments
violate an agreement the companies made with the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) and the coalition in October 1999 to avoid duplicative animal
testing. The coalition is headed by the Physicians Committee for Responsible
Medicine (PCRM).

The cyclohexanol debate is the latest development in an ongoing controversy
over the EPAs High Production Volume Challenge, a gargantuan program promoting
toxicity testing on 2,800 industrial chemicals.

DuPont and Honeywell will put animals through shockingly cruel tests,
blatantly ignoring the terms of an agreement they made to minimize unnecessary
animal testing, says PCRM staff scientist Nicole Cardello, M.H.S., who
recently reviewed the companies proposed test plan. Ms. Cardello filed a
criticism with the EPA on behalf of the coalition last week.

There is already strong evidence that cyclohexanol is a health threat, Ms.
Cardello said. We can only surmise that DuPont and Honeywell want to retest
this chemical in hopes of producing conflicting results, data that might cast
doubt on its toxicity. In the tests, experimenters will force confined rats to
inhale massive doses of the suspected poison, and then kill and dissect them.

DuPont has an especially poor record within the HPV program, says Ms.
Cardello. Previously, it proposed painful animal tests on adipic acid, a food
additive the Food and Drug Administration already deems safe for human
consumption.

PCRM argues that the HPV program, estimated to involve more than 100,000
animals lives, violates federal law because it doesnt allow for meaningful
public input. The organization will file a lawsuit against the EPA in April.

Last year, PCRM published a comprehensive report proving many of the proposed
animal tests are redundant and unnecessary, and will fail to protect the
environment or public health. At a chemical industry conference on March 13,
an EPA official corroborated some of these charges when she admitted
duplicative testing is a problem and called the program a mess.

PCRM believes that animal tests are not the best predictors of dangers to
humans and that alternative testing methods are more reliable. Furthermore,
significant human exposure informationmore pertinent than that gleaned from
animal testsalready exists for many chemicals as theyve been in use for years.
Despite this abundance of valuable data, the EPA has been slow to regulate
risky products and has not banned a single industrial chemical known to be
toxic in more than a decade.

Founded in 1985, PCRM promotes preventive medicine, especially good nutrition,
and higher standards in medical research, education, and practice.

For more information, contact: Simon Chaitowitz Communications Director
Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine 202-686-2210, ext. 309
simonc@pcrm.org Web site: http://www.pcrm.org