Antidote Europe welcomes recent French media reports warning the public about dangerous medicines.
More Press Releases
Jan 6, ’11
Oct 12, ’10
The campaign’s report presents an immediate science strategy to end poisoning tests on non-human primates.
Jul 6, ’10
Antidote Europe has criticised the French government for taking very timid measures to ban the synthetic chemical bisphenol A (BPA). It makes no sense to protect nursing infants by banning the substance in baby bottles when their mothers are exposed to it on a daily basis — not to mention the effect on the foetuses of pregnant women.
Feb 10, ’10
Antidote Europe has re-issued its warning on bisphenol A, criticizing the French Food Safety Agency (AFSSA) on its confused and unclear public announcements regarding this chemical.
Nov 26, ’09
Antidote Europe was awarded the Pietro Croce prize.
Aug 5, ’09
Antidote Europe has launched a public campaign regarding the dangers of bisphenol A and has duly informed the new president of the European Parliament.
Jul 8, ’09
It is difficult to understand why food safety agencies continue to place their trust in ambiguous animal data when human data is readily available. The fact that DES and BPA share striking similarities in their structures is extremely worrisome and lends weight to the possibility that BPA is a “chemical time bomb” in terms of our health.
Mar 30, ’09
With a crucial vote about to take place on Tuesday 31st March, by the Agriculture Committee (AGRI) of the European Parliament, Antidote Europe has written to all members of this committee, urging them to include a clause in the revised version of the 86/609 directive, to facilitate the adoption of any scientifically sound, non animal method, based on the “weight of evidence” principle. Such a clause would significantly increase the scope and application of non animal methods in practice.
Aug 25, ’08
According to EFSA, the exposure of the human foetus to bisphenol A would be negligible because the mother rapidly metabolizes and eliminates this substance from her body. This conclusion is in contradiction with basic pharmacokinetics knowledge.
Jun 17, ’08
Antidote Europe has issued an urgent caution against the idea of transplanting animal organs into people.
Justice for our health
Tue 5 Feb 2008
Antidote Europe has lodged a complaint with the European Mediator for wasting precious time and resources in the battle against cancer.
A complaint has been lodged with the EU ombudsman on grounds of maladministration on the part of the European Commission (EC). The complaint arises from EC project (“PL037712”), which will run for five years at a cost of more than ten million euros, and whose aim is to assess the cancer-causing potential of chemical substances. Antidote Europe is challenging the project on the grounds that the research methods in question are already available and that the EU study is therefore wasting precious time and resources in the battle against cancer.
The project in question specifically relates to screening methods for detecting cancer, using the science of ‘genomics’ (gene response), also known as ‘cancerogenomics’. Such tests are already in use in the US and in Japan, and have been available for the past decade. These gene tests represent just one of the many applications of modern toxicology, known collectively as ‘toxicogenomics’. Other applications of this technology include the risk assessment of chemicals with respect to their effects on the nervous system and the reproductive system.
In commissioning the said study, the EC is behaving as if it is fundamentally unaware of the fact that regulatory authorities have already responded favourably to such studies. The FDA (1) and EMEA (2) — whose remit it is to assess chemical substances — are actively encouraging the submission of data based on such gene tests. The EC must now address Antidote Europe’s complaint to the EU ombudsman. This action follows earlier efforts by Antidote Europe of informing a key EC scientific consultant, Dr Thomas Hartung, director of the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM).
Antidote Europe fears that five valuable years will have been wasted if the project goes ahead as planned. In effect, this means that risk assessment of chemicals will continue to rely on animal experiments, even though they have been criticised by Dr Hartung as constituting ‘simply bad science’. In view of the entry into force of the REACH (3) legislation in June 2007, there is now a real danger that thousands of chemicals could be allowed on to the market on the basis of animal tests, which could seriously compromise human health. Cancer has already become the number one cause of death in France. This trend will certainly not be reversed if we continue to rely on ‘bad science’ in place of ‘twenty-first century science’(4), which is already available and is clearly more cost effective.
The complaint lodged by Antidote Europe already has the support of 81 organisations from nine different countries, representing a total of more than 300,000 EU citizens. More signatures are on the way and will be added to our complaint to the ombudsman. These groups campaign on several fronts (health, environment, animal welfare) and reflect the concerns shared by all those who care about responsible management of our health and our environment - the very aim of the EU chemicals testing program, REACH.
Antidote Europe is a non profit NGO, comprising research scientists with past careers at the French-based Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) sharing a common goal of improving human health.
(1) US Food and Drug Administration
(2) European Medicines Agency
(3) Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals
(4) “Toxicology in the twenty-first century: a vision and a strategy”: report by the US National Academy of Sciences, which strongly supports the use of toxicogenomics and a move towards ‘toxicity testing from a system based on whole animal testing to one founded primarily on in vitro methods that evaluate changes in biologic processes using cells, cell lines, or cellular components, preferably of human origin’.