Abstract
Animal use has been an important aspect of toxicology and animal models have played a critical role in understanding how toxicities are expressed. Because animals have been used in testing and mechanism investigations, the knowledge base in toxicology has progressed to the extent that not only are we able to understand how toxicities occur, but toxicology itself is now an established medical discipline. Indeed, just feeding and weighing of animals or counting those that died during a study fall woefully short in assessing human health risks associated with the vast number of diverse chemicals in commerce. Consequently, alternatives to animal testing have been and are continuing to be developed to improve the quality of human health risks. The evolution in toxicological testing methods didn’t just happen overnight and it didn’t come easily.
A contributor to the growth of toxicology into a discipline, able to stand on its own with its own knowledge base, has been rooted in the development and use of alternative nonanimal and in vitro testing methods. The American College of Toxicology (ACT), who sponsors and supports this journal, advocated the use of alternative methods for developing toxicological information and the efforts to “reduce, refine and replace,” commonly referred to as the “3Rs.” 1 The ACT policy was initially adopted in 1988 and has been updated since on several occasions.
The evolution and development of nonanimal and in vitro, along with newer and better animal testing systems, is documented in the recently published The History of Alternative Test Methods in Toxicology. The book is a volume which is part of the series entitled History of Toxicology and Environmental Health. The History of Alternative Test Methods in Toxicology, however, is far from just a history of nonanimal testing in toxicology. It is rich with “how” and “why” in addition to “what” and “when.”
The book is 350 pages and edited by 3 respected toxicologists, each with career credential and commitments to alternative testing methods in toxicology. In addition to the qualified editors, the chapters in the book were authored by over 60 contributors.
The organization of the book is divided into 6 sections, with the first section serving as an introduction. Each editor wrote one of the 3 introductory chapters which make up section 1. The second section covers contributions to alternative test methods from various countries, geographical areas, and organizations that were, and to a large extent still are, dedicated to developing alternative toxicity testing methods.
Section 3 addresses important issues associated with various applications of alternative test methods. These issues are divided into areas of use and type of classical testing areas. Testing for a chemical in a specific use include cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, industrial or bulk chemicals, pesticides, food additives, and biologics. The type of alternative testing methods that present unique and sometimes complex issues addressed in the section include inhalation testing, carcinogenicity and reproductive toxicity testing, imaging, biomonitoring, and human dosing.
The fourth section describes the accumulation, management, and dissemination of the data outputs of the various alternative methods. The fifth section identifies specific tools and technologies that support alternative test methods in toxicology such as validation tools, computational methods, and microphysiological systems. The sixth and final section lays out the current status of alternative testing methods and some future prospects that are technologically feasible.
The complete elimination of animals in toxicity testing and research is not going to happen in the near future. However, the mega-mouse studies of the past are not part of toxicology’s future. To be sure, we will still need whole animals to validate alternative methods in both testing and research in toxicology. Furthermore, not all the evidence we need to assess human health risk can be obtained using alternative methods, but the transitions to alternative methods in toxicology experimentations have been made in the past and similar transitions can and will be made in the future.
The History of Alternative Test Methods in Toxicology provides a clear description and presents an understanding of how alternative test and research methods evolved in the past. More importantly, however, the treatise lays the foundation of how the science of toxicology can move forward with developing additional nonanimal test and research methods. The book is not a classical history book, although certain segments make interesting and enjoyable reading. The real value of the book is in its character as a reference source and nuggets of information that it contains: historical—yes; guidance for the future—most certainly! With that understanding, a preferable version of the book is the e-book which is capable of electronic searching.