Correlation of Animal Test Methods with Human Experience for Household Products

Abstract Consumer products intended for distribution to the public need to be tested for their capacity to cause irritation or injury as a result of accidental exposure to the eye. Results from three animal eye irritation test methods, used to assess eye irritation potential, were compared to documented human experience for selected categories of household consumer products. All the animal methods produced more severe eye responses than were reported from human eye accidents with the same consumer products. The low-volume rabbit eye test gave a closer correlation with the human data than did any of the other animal tests. The data support the conclusion that the low-volume rabbit test permits better discrimination and thus is more useful in evaluating the eye irritation potential of certain categories of consumer products.