Environmental Health and Safety (EHS) in the Animal Industry
By Richelle Romanchik | December 4th, 2025
As animal husbandry and toxicology are considered general industry, they are governed by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration OSHA (in the US) and must follow the environmental, health, and safety (EHS) standards that all industries are required to follow, in addition to other industry specific guidelines that are considered best practices. A common best practice is provided by the Center for Disease Control (CDC), known as the Biosafety in Microbial and Biomedical Laboratories (BMBL), which details Best Management Practices (BMPs) for Biosafety Laboratories levels 1-4. These regulations and BMPs help mitigate risks to employees and keep the environment safe. There are similar requirements in other countries as well, where animal testing is occurring.
EHS professionals work to keep people safe within these facilities, just as animal technicians work to keep the animals safe. A robust, safety-focused EHS program is imperative in this industry, yet it is not often discussed. It deserves attention, however, because biosafety laboratories, especially those involving animals and toxicological testing, present unique hazards. A typical EHS program will work through the Hierarchy of Controls based on knowledge of Risk, which is defined as “severity x likelihood”, and determine the appropriate controls needed. The issue arises here because many of the compounds being tested lack physical, environmental, and health hazard information, as this is the reason they are being tested. The question then is, what level of protection is necessary to effectively mitigate hazards?
Employees working with animals encounter a wide variety of safety hazards on a daily basis, including hazards such as animal bites, chemical and allergen exposure, slips, trips, and falls, first aid, and even ergonomic concerns. Each species also presents risks. For example, nonhuman primates can carry the Herpes B virus, which can be asymptomatic in an animal but can be life-threatening to humans if exposure occurs. Guinea pigs can produce noise levels that can cause hearing loss after extended exposure. Additionally, many people develop allergies to rodents over time, making an allergen protection program essential.
Another common issue that arises during the care of animals involves not only physical health hazards, but also mental health challenges, which are not often considered. Compassion fatigue is a common reason for burnout among employees working with animals in toxicology due to the nature of their work. Many become attached to the animals and face hardships when the animals suffer or are sacrificed in the course of their work.
Other employees working in animal facilities, such as the maintenance staff, face additional hazards as well: confined spaces, hot work, electrical safety risks, working at heights, chemical exposures, machinery related injuries, heavy lifting, and other safety concerns. All of these hazards are present in biosafety laboratories. They are standard occupational risks found across all types of industries and must be evaluated regularly to keep employees informed and to mitigate hazards as much as possible.
Environmentally, there are a number of potential issues related to permitting, monitoring, and compliance for air, water, and waste discharges. Environmental concerns and monitoring pose a unique problem for companies that use chemicals of unknown toxicity, including biological, universal, hazardous, and chemical wastes. Due to the variety of chemicals that are either being used or tested, discharges can vary and be unknown to the environment. Animals also add an additional layer of complexity, with their own wastes, from daily excretions to end-of-life removal, which must be accounted for.
As regulations and industry standards continue to evolve, we must not lose sight of the people who care for these animals and carry out the daily work of in vivo toxicological studies. This responsibility extends beyond those directly handling the animals to include the essential support staff who keep operations running day to day. Protecting these individuals is just as critical as safeguarding the animals themselves. They face not only routine environmental, health and safety challenges, but also unpredictable hazards unique to this field. Even as animal testing is gradually phased out, many of these EHS concerns will persist across the industry. If we fail to adequately protect the workers in these facilities, how can we expect them to protect the animals entrusted to their care?
The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Johns Hopkins University or Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.
