FOI - Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986
Published 13 January 2026
ATI1132 Request
For the 2020 Charles River study (Test Facility Study No. 286563) involving Carbadox, that was published on the web in a series of versions the following was made clear:
A Home Office project licence was obtained under ASPA, given that the study involved swine and procedures like dosing and tissue sampling, which are regulated under ASPA.
A VMD ATC was secured to permit the use of Carbadox, a banned substance in the UK, for the FDA-sponsored residue study. The VMD would have required confirmation that the study complied with ASPA, likely referencing the Home Office licence.
Please can you confirm that a VMD ATC was secured to permit the use of Carbadox at Charles River Tranent as the study itself confirms was the case?
I can provide the actual Home Office Project Licence number if that helps you check your records.
Our reply
We have no record of an ATC application having been submitted for the study you referenced.
You may find it useful to know that this type of study, a residue study at an experimental facility described as regulated under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, would not require an ATC if the animal produce was not intended for the food-chain.
Such a study would be exempted from the Veterinary Medicines Regulations 2013, as amended, under Regulation 3(2):
They [the regulations] do not apply in relation to a product intended for administration in the course of a procedure licensed under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, except that, if the animals are to be put into the human food chain, the only products that may be administered to the animals are—
(a)authorised veterinary medicinal products administered in accordance with their marketing authorisation; or
(b)products administered in accordance with an animal test certificate granted under paragraph 9 of Schedule 4.