Open letter: Iceland must consistently apply EU law in the horse blood industry (Kopie 1)

On February 24, 2026, together with the umbrella organization of European animal welfare organizations, Eurogroup for Animals, and the Icelandic NGO Dýraverndarsamband Íslands (DÍS), we sent an open letter to Icelandic Minister of Industry Hanna Katrín Friðriksson, Director of the Icelandic Food and Veterinary Authority (MAST), Hrönn Ólína Jörundsdóttir, and the Chief Veterinary Officer, Þóra J. Jónassdóttir. We call on them to finally evaluate blood sampling for PMSG in accordance with the applicable guidelines and to apply the relevant guidelines. 

The focus is on the Icelandic horse blood industry. The hormone PMSG (pregnant mare serum gonadotropin, also known as eCG or equine chorionic gonadotropin) is extracted from the blood of pregnant mares. This hormone is used in intensive animal breeding to control fertility and synchronize estrus cycles, for example in pigs or sheep. 

A large proportion of the PMSG destined for the European market comes from Iceland. There, the company Ísteka is attempting to have its highly intensive blood collection classified as “traditional agriculture” rather than a scientific procedure. And this distinction is crucial: if the practice falls under EU Directive 2010/63/EU on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes, significantly stricter animal welfare regulations apply.

However, Ísteka wants industrial blood collection to be classified as an agricultural “ancillary activity” – comparable to milking or sheep shearing. This would give the company much more freedom in its handling of the mares. However, in our view, characterizing industrial blood collection as agricultural practice deliberately obscures the industrial and pharmaceutical nature of the procedure.

Clear legal situation – unclear implementation

The EFTA Surveillance Authority has already concluded that Iceland has violated EEA law by not subjecting blood collection to the relevant directive. As a result, Iceland had to apply its national legislation for the protection of animals for scientific use (Regulation 460/2017) that is based on EU/EEA law.

In our view, the matter is clear:

• The collection of large quantities of blood for pharmaceutical production is a scientific use. Animals used for the production of medicinal products are protected by EU Directive 2010/63/EU. 
• The use of large needles – sometimes under anesthesia – exceeds the pain threshold defined in the directive.
• The mares are not primarily kept for food production, but are used as a “source of biological raw materials” for a pharmaceutical product.
• The extraction of a hormone for the specific purpose of influencing physiological processes in farm animals is not a “recognized agricultural practice.”
• According to the 3R principle, procedures that use live animals must be replaced by alternative methods wherever possible. There are numerous alternatives to PMSG.

As long as economic interests outweigh animal welfare, political pressure remains essential. EU law must not be open to interpretation—especially when it comes to the protection of sentient beings.

Read the open letter here.