Occupational exposure limits for reproductive toxicants - A comparative analysis.

We investigated the level of protection of reproductive and developmental toxicity offered through occupational exposure limits (OELs) and Derived No-Effect Levels for workers' inhalation exposure (wDNELs). We compared coverage of substances that have a harmonised classification as reproductive toxicant 1 A or 1B (Repr.1 A/B), numerical values and scientific basis of 12 lists of OELs and wDNELs from REACH Registrants' and the Committee for Risk Assessment. Across the 14 sources of OELs and wDNELs, 53 % of the Repr1A/B-substances had at least one exposure limit (counting groups of metals as one entry). Registrants' wDNELs covered the largest share, 40 %. The numerical values could be highly variable for the same substance across the lists. How often reproductive toxicity is identified as the critical effect varies between the examined lists, both due to different assessments of the same substance and different substance coverage. Reviewing the margin of safety to reproductive toxicity cited in the documents, we found that 15 % of safety margins were lower to reproductive toxicity than the critical effect. To conclude, neither the REACH nor work environment legislation supply wDNELs or OELs for a substantial share of known reproductive toxicants. EU OELs cover among the fewest substances in the range, and in many cases national OELs or wDNELs are set at more conservative levels.

Water, soap, and hand-disinfectant exposure during the COVID-19 pandemic and self-reported hand eczema in frontline workers: A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, increased hand hygiene practices were implemented. Impaired skin health on the hands among healthcare workers has been reported previously. Knowledge of how worker in other occupations have been affected is scarce. OBJECTIVES: To investigate self-reported hand water-, and soap exposure and use of hand disinfectants, and hand eczema (HE) in frontline workers outside the hospital setting and in IT personnel during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, a questionnaire was sent out between 1 March and 30 April in 2021, to 6060 randomly selected individuals representing six occupational groups. RESULTS: A significant increase in water exposure and hand disinfectant use was shown: Relative position (RP) 19; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17-0.21 and RP = 0.38: 95% CI 0.36-0.41, respectively. Newly debuted HE was reported by 7.4% of the population, more frequently among frontline workers (8.6%) compared to IT personnel (4.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Water and soap exposure and use of hand disinfectants increased during COVID-19 pandemic, which may increase the risk of hand eczema. This highlights the importance of communication and implementation of preventive measures to protect the skin barrier also in occupations other than healthcare workers.

Hexavalent chromium still a concern in Sweden - Evidence from a cross-sectional study within the SafeChrom project.

OBJECTIVES: Hexavalent chromium (Cr(VI)) is classified as a human carcinogen. Occupational Cr(VI) exposure can occur during different work processes, but the current exposure to Cr(VI) at Swedish workplaces is unknown. METHODS: This cross-sectional study (SafeChrom) recruited non-smoking men and women from 14 companies with potential Cr(VI) exposure (n = 113) and controls from 6 companies without Cr(VI) exposure (n = 72). Inhalable Cr(VI) was measured by personal air sampling (outside of respiratory protection) in exposed workers. Total Cr was measured in urine (pre- and post-shift, density-adjusted) and red blood cells (RBC) (reflecting Cr(VI)) in exposed workers and controls. The Bayesian tool Expostats was used to assess risk and evaluate occupational exposure limit (OEL) compliance. RESULTS: The exposed workers performed processing of metal products, steel production, welding, plating, and various chemical processes. The geometric mean concentration of inhalable Cr(VI) in exposed workers was 0.15 µg/m3 (95% confidence interval: 0.11-0.21). Eight of the 113 exposed workers (7%) exceeded the Swedish OEL of 5 µg/m3, and the Bayesian analysis estimated the share of OEL exceedances up to 19.6% for stainless steel welders. Median post-shift urinary (0.60 µg/L, 5th-95th percentile 0.10-3.20) and RBC concentrations (0.73 µg/L, 0.51-2.33) of Cr were significantly higher in the exposed group compared with the controls (urinary 0.10 µg/L, 0.06-0.56 and RBC 0.53 µg/L, 0.42-0.72). Inhalable Cr(VI) correlated with urinary Cr (rS = 0.64) and RBC-Cr (rS = 0.53). Workers within steel production showed the highest concentrations of inhalable, urinary and RBC Cr. Workers with inferred non-acceptable local exhaustion ventilation showed significantly higher inhalable Cr(VI), urinary and RBC Cr concentrations compared with those with inferred acceptable ventilation. Furthermore, workers with inferred correct use of respiratory protection were exposed to significantly higher concentrations of Cr(VI) in air and had higher levels of Cr in urine and RBC than those assessed with incorrect or no use. Based on the Swedish job-exposure-matrix, approximately 17 900 workers were estimated to be occupationally exposed to Cr(VI) today. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that some workers in Sweden are exposed to high levels of the non-threshold carcinogen Cr(VI). Employers and workers seem aware of Cr(VI) exposure, but more efficient exposure control strategies are required. National strategies aligned with the European strategies are needed in order to eliminate this cause of occupational cancer.

Safety data sheets as an information pathway on hazards of occupationally used cleaning agents.

To investigate consistency and accessibility of asthma and skin allergy hazard information in safety data sheets (SDSs) for cleaning agents on the Swedish market, we compiled a database of 504 SDSs and 351 therein declared ingredients. Labelling of products was compared to that of ingredients according to harmonised classification. For each ingredient, also notified classification and three additional sources on sensitising properties were compared. Product labelling most frequently indicated corrosion and irritation hazards. Only 3% of products were labelled as skin sensitisers and none as asthmagens. According to harmonised classification, 9% of products contained skin sensitisers, using other information sources increased the number to 46%. While 2% of products contained respiratory sensitisers according to harmonised classification, the number increased to 17% when using other information sources. Furthermore, sensitisers were declared across several sections of the SDSs, hampering easy access of such information. In conclusion, there are inconsistencies in hazard identification of cleaning agents and their ingredients. Hence, SDSs may not altogether fulfil its hazard information role. Improved criteria for identifying sensitisers and respiratory irritants are warranted. Additionally, we argue that all ingredients should be listed in section 3 regardless of concentration, to facilitate access of information about sensitising properties.

A scoping review of evaluations of and recommendations for default uncertainty factors in human health risk assessment.

Uncertainty factors (UFs) are used to account for uncertainties and variability when setting exposure limits or guidance values. Starting from a proposal of a single UF of 100 to extrapolate from an animal NOAEL to a human acceptable exposure, the aspects of uncertainty and number of UFs have diversified and today there are several risk assessment guidelines that contain schemes of default UFs of varying complexity. In the present work, we scoped the scientific literature on default UFs to map developments regarding recommendations and evaluations of these. We identified 91 publications making recommendations for one or several UFs and 55 publications evaluating UFs without making explicit recommendations about numerical values; these were published between 1954 and 2021. The 2000s was the decade with the largest number of publications, interspecies differences and intraspecies variability being the most frequent topics. The academic sector has been the most active (76 out of 146 publications). Authors from the private sector more often presented UF recommendations, but differences between sectors regarding size of recommendations were not statistically significant. The empirical underpinning of the reviewed recommendations ranges from four to 462 chemicals, that is, relatively low numbers compared with the range of chemicals these default UFs are expected to cover. The recommended UFs have remained remarkably constant, with merely a slight decrease over time. Although chemical specific UFs are preferable, the widespread use of default UFs warrants further attention regarding their empirical and normative basis.

An Overview of Cleaning Agents' Health Hazards and Occupational Injuries and Diseases Attributed to Them in Sweden.

Using data from the Swedish Products Register, hosted by the Swedish Chemicals Agency (KemI), national occupational injury and disease statistics, and call records from the Swedish Poisons Information Centre (PIC) we characterize health hazards of marketed cleaning products and recorded injuries, disease, and incidents linked to cleaning or disinfection agents. The results show that cleaning agents pose many kinds of health hazards, although corrosion and irritation hazards dominate, in particular for the eyes (54% of all included products). Few products were recognized as inhalation hazards. The nature of the health hazards is reflected in the occupational disease and injury statistics and PIC records for eyes and skin but not for the respiratory tract. Among occupational disease cases attributed to cleaning or disinfection agents, 61% concern skin and 26% the respiratory tract. Among occupational injury cases 64% concern chemical burns. However, only a small part (<0.5%) of all reported diseases and injuries were explicitly attributed to cleaning or disinfection agents. On average, there were 11 cases of disease attributed to cleaning or disinfection agents per million workers and year. For occupational injuries the corresponding number was 8. The data concern a broad range of sectors and occupations, but notable sectors were healthcare, accommodation and food service, and manufacturing. Women were more likely to suffer from disease, men and women equally likely to suffer from injury. PIC cases were evenly distributed between men and women, but the clear risk cases more frequently involved men. Occupational diseases increased many-fold in 2020 while injuries decreased, which could be due to COVID-19 changing use patterns of cleaning and disinfection agents at work. We conclude that cleaning agents pose a variety of risks to a large part of the workforce, although particular attention for preventive efforts may need to be directed to the healthcare, accommodation and food service, and manufacturing sectors.

Socioscientific Issues in Science Education: An opportunity to Incorporate Education about Risk and Risk Analysis?

Socioscientific issues (SSI) concern social issues, often lacking simple solutions, that relate to science and often also risk controversies. SSIs have become an established part of science education, aiming to teach students not only about content knowledge but also about the nature of science and to offer them practice in argumentation and decision making. We performed a scoping review of the literature on SSI in science education research, in order to investigate if the topics covered would lean themselves to education about risk, and if risk is raised in these works. Using Web of Science we identified 296 empirical publications and 91 theoretical or review publications about SSI teaching in science education. The empirical publications covered studies performed in primary to tertiary school, most commonly upper secondary school (32%). The most frequently taught SSI themes were nature conservation, biotechnology, and climate change. Despite that these, as most of the other identified themes, clearly are connected to risk analysis and risk management, few publications raised the concept of risk and the methods of risk analysis. In fact, almost half (empirical: 48%, theoretical: 49%) did not mention risk at all. We argue that SSIs present an opportunity for risk researchers to engage with educators to incorporate risk in school science education and to contribute in developing teaching materials suitable toward that aim.

Exposures to lead during urban combat training.

Lead exposure is still a major concern for occupations that regularly train or work with firearms, such as law enforcement and military personnel. Due to the increasing number of women of fertile age in such professions, there is a strong incentive to monitor lead exposures during firearms training. Personal air sampling was performed during two sessions of a nine-day urban combat training (UCT) course for cadets in the Swedish Armed Forces, one session employing leaded ammunition (leaded scenario) and one session employing unleaded ammunition (unleaded scenario). Blood lead levels (BLLs) were measured before and after the course for 42 cadets and five instructors. During the leaded scenario, the instructors' airborne exposure (geometric mean, GM, 72.0 µg/m3) was higher than that of cadets (GM 42.9 µg/m3). During the unleaded scenario, airborne concentrations were similar for instructors and cadets and considerably lower than during the leaded scenario (GM 2.9 µg/m3). Despite comparably low external lead exposures during the course, we saw a statistically significant increase in systemic exposure for cadets (BLL GM increased from 1.09 to 1.71 µg/dL, p < 0.001). For the five instructors, notable differences were seen depending on task. The largest increase was seen for the two instructors performing close supervision during the leaded scenario (BLL GM increased from 2.41 µg/dL to 4.83 µg/dL). For the remaining three instructors the BLLs were unchanged (BLL GMs were 1.25 µg/dL before the course and 1.26 µg/dL after). None of the participants exceeded the applicable biological exposure limits, but extrapolating our findings shows that instructors in the leaded scenario may reach levels around 10 µg/dL after a year of repeated exposures. We conclude that comparably low airborne concentrations can contribute to the body burden of lead and that additional measures to reduce exposure are warranted, particularly for instructors.

Management of bias and conflict of interest among occupational exposure limit expert groups.

Our aim was to evaluate policies and procedures for management of conflict of interest (CoI) and other sources of bias, implemented in Occupational Exposure Limit (OEL) expert groups. First, we compiled procedural criteria applicable to OEL-setting, based on literature on CoI and systematic reviews. Second, we identified 58 global OEL-sources and sought the underlying expert groups and operating procedures. We identified eleven active groups, of which five have documented CoI policies. In all five, CoI management is based on declarations of interests (DoIs) and removal of experts from decisions in which they have an interest. Notable differences include publication of DoIs (three of five groups), limitation of DoI to current interests (two groups), quantitative limits for financial interests (none specified to ≥€10,000 per interest), control procedures for undisclosed CoI (one group), and procedures in case of discovery of undisclosed CoI (three groups). Methods to evaluate study quality are described by three groups, while reproducible and comprehensive strategies to identify and select data receive less attention. We conclude that procedures to manage CoI and bias are not broadly implemented, or at least not openly and transparently communicated. This lack of visible procedures is remarkable, considering OEL's impact on health and economy.

A scoping survey of attitudes towards occupational exposure limits and REACH derived no effect levels for workers among chemical risk managers at Swedish workplaces.

OBJECTIVES: Setting and implementing occupational exposure limits (OELs) is one of the measures taken to protect workers from adverse effects of hazardous chemicals. The EU Regulation on Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) introduced an additional kind of exposure guidance values for workers; namely, the derived no effect level (DNEL) for workers' inhalation exposure (worker DNEL). About 500 substances have a Swedish OEL, while roughly 5000 substances have a worker DNEL derived by REACH registrants. This work aims to investigate how the Swedish OELs and worker DNELs are perceived at Swedish workplaces, and whether worker DNELs are considered a possible alternative to OELs when the latter are lacking. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An online questionnaire was designed and sent to Swedish companies identified through the European Chemicals Agency's database of registered substances (N = 126) and the Swedish Chemicals Agency's registry of companies that import or manufacture notifiable chemical products (N = 227). The response rates were 52% and 38%, respectively. RESULTS: The respondents stated that they were using the Swedish OELs and most of them considered these to be a suitable risk management tool. As about one-third of the respondents expressed that they had some experience in using substances without the Swedish OELs, there are certain data gaps that worker DNELs may fill. One-third of the respondents familiar with worker DNELs stated that they would consider using worker DNELs for substances without the Swedish OELs. However, nearly half of the respondents reported to be unfamiliar with worker DNELs. CONCLUSIONS: Poor familiarity with DNELs may pose an obstacle to properly recognizing DNELs' potential as well as the possible limitations of individual DNELs. There is a need for education about DNELs, as well as for tools facilitating the evaluation of DNELs and OELs from other sources in cases where the applicable Swedish OEL is lacking. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2020;33(5):611-20.

A novel approach to monitor skin permeation of metals in vitro.

How metals permeate skin is poorly understood. Risk assessments tend to take default approaches to account for the dermal route, often using numbers of questionable relevance. Moreover, simultaneous exposure to multiple metals may affect the permeation of individual metals. To investigate this, we developed an experimental setup where receptor medium circulates directly from a conventional diffusion cell for in vitro skin absorption into an inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometer (ICP-MS), enabling continuous measurement of metal concentration. Full-thickness piglet skin was used as diffusion barrier, artificial sweat as donor medium and phosphate buffered saline as receptor medium. Percutaneous absorption from donor medium containing 2 mmol/L of nickel, cobalt, or chromium or all three combined was monitored for 2 h. Metals retained in skin were quantified post-exposure. Percutaneous absorption of nickel was faster in single than in combined exposure; for cobalt and chromium no such difference was apparent. Similar amounts of the three metals were retained in skin after single exposure, and retention was consistently higher for each metal after combined exposure. This study provides proof-of-concept for a method that reliably detects concentration changes in physiologically relevant medium. It may shed light on skin absorption and permeation kinetics of metals and risks associated with metal exposure.

Calls made to the Poisons Information Centre reveal need for improved risk management of cleaning agents in the workplace.

Purpose. This study aimed to investigate chemical injuries caused by cleaning agents and disinfectants by reviewing poison control data. Methods. We performed a 5-year retrospective analysis of calls to the Swedish Poisons Information Centre (PIC) concerning occupational use of cleaning agents and disinfectants. In addition, callers for 17 new cases were interviewed. Results. Out of 8240 occupationally related cases handled by the PIC during 2010-2014, 24% concerned cleaning agents and disinfectants (N = 1983). Of these, one-third were classified as major risk cases, generally due to potential for corrosive eye and skin injuries. The most frequent type of workplace was restaurants and caterers. However, information about occupation was only identifiable for 30% of the cases. Follow-up interviews exemplify how limited awareness of safety data sheets and disregard of protective equipment may contribute to health-related outcomes such as absence at work. Conclusions. Management and prevention strategies for cleaning agents should be improved. PIC records hold relevant information both for designing interventions and for future research on occupational health and safety management. We suggest that systematic collection by the PIC of information on occupation and age would further improve the usefulness for occupational injury surveillance purposes.

Industry Derived Occupational Exposure Limits: A Survey of Professionals on the Dutch System of Exposure Guidelines.

The Netherlands' system for occupational exposure limits (OELs) encompasses two kinds of OELs: public and private. Public OELs are set by the government. Private OELs are derived by industry and cover all substances without a public OEL. In parallel, the regulation concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) has introduced an exposure guidance value similar to the OEL, namely the Derived No-Effect Level (DNEL) for workers' inhalation exposure. This study aimed to investigate issues encountered by occupational health professionals regarding private OELs, and how they perceive the DNELs for workers in relation to private OELs. Towards this aim, we sent out a web-based questionnaire to the members of the Dutch professional organization for occupational hygienists (Nederlandse Vereniging voor Arbeidshygiëne [NVVA], n = 513) and to members of the Dutch professional organization for safety engineers (NVVK, n = 2916). Response rates were 27% (n = 139) and 7% (n = 198), respectively. More occupational hygienists (59%) than safety engineers (17%) reported to derive private OELs themselves. Our respondents reported several challenges with the derivation of private OELs. Fifty-one percent of the occupational hygienists and 20% of the safety engineers stated to see a role of REACH Registrants' worker DNELs as private OELs. However, more than half of our respondents were undecided or unfamiliar with worker DNELs. In addition, stated opinions on where worker DNELs fit in the hierarchy of private OELs varied considerably. To conclude, both these professional groups derive private OELs and stated that they need more guidance for this. Furthermore, there is a lack of clarity whether worker DNELs may qualify as private OELs, and where they would fit in the hierarchy of private OELs.

Will worker DNELs derived under the European REACH regulation extend the landscape of occupational exposure guidance values?

Derived no-effect levels for workers (wDNELs) under the European REACH legislation have many aspects in common with occupational exposure limits (OELs). In an attempt to examine under which circumstances wDNELs might be used as exposure guidance outside their intended application, we compared derivation methods, coverage of substances and numerical values of wDNELs against two regulatory OEL lists (European Commission and Sweden) and three sets of recommendations (European SCOEL, German MAK and US ACGIH). Finally, we looked closer at wDNELs where SCOEL concluded that data were insufficient to derive an OEL. Major differences between wDNELs and OELs include regulatory background, intended use, actors involved, substance selection criteria, transparency and procedure of derivation, and operationalisation in terms of risk management measures. As of summer 2018, approximately five times more substances were covered by wDNELs than by the five sets of OELs examined herein. Meanwhile, many occupationally relevant pollutants were not covered by wDNELs, e.g. one-third of Swedish OELs lack corresponding wDNELs. We also note that wDNELs and OELs for the same substance may vary considerably, up to several orders of magnitude. In conclusion, with extensive substance coverage, wDNELs extend the landscape beyond the OELs. That said, important limitations are (1) that many air pollutants relevant for workers' health are not covered by REACH, and (2) concerns for inconsistencies in the derivation of wDNELs and in their level of protection. In particular, that route-to-route extrapolation is a common practice that may be grossly misleading when the effect of concern is local, e.g. sensitisation.

Educating about radiation risks in high schools: towards improved public understanding of the complexity of low-dose radiation health effects.

The levels of stochastic health effects following exposure to low doses of ionising radiation are not well known. A consequence of the uncertainty is that any radiation exposure is met with deep concern-both by the public and by scientists who disagree about how the partly conflicting results from low-dose studies should be interpreted. The concern is not limited to ionising radiation but is inherent to other areas of modern technologies such as biotechnology or electromagnetic fields. The everyday presence of advanced technologies confronts people with the necessity to take decisions and there is an ongoing debate regarding both the nature and magnitude of potential risks and how education efforts may empower peoples´ decision-making. In the field of radiation research there are different opinions regarding the optimal education methods, spanning from the idea that peoples' fears will be eliminated by introducing dose thresholds below which the risk is assumed to be zero, to suggestions of concentrating research efforts in an attempt to eliminate all uncertainties regarding the effects of low doses. The aim of this paper was to present our approach which is based on developing an education program at the secondary school level where students learn to understand the role of science in society. Teaching about radiation risk as a socio-scientific issue is not based on presenting facts but on showing risks in a broader perspective aiming at developing students' competency in making decisions based on informed assessment. We hope to stimulate and encourage other researchers to pursue similar approaches.

Percutaneous absorption of thirty-eight organic solvents in vitro using pig skin.

Percutaneous absorption is highly variable between chemicals but also within chemicals depending on exposure conditions and experimental set up. We tested a larger number of organic solvents with the same experimental set up, using skin from new-born piglets and static diffusion cells. Thirty-six common organic solvents were studied neat (and 31 of them also in water dilution): acetone, acetonitrile, n-butanol 2-butanone 2-butoxyethanol, 1-butoxy-2-propanol, n-butyl acetate, butyl acrylate, cyclohexane, cyclohexanone, 1,2-dichloroethane, dichloromethane, ethanol, 2-ethoxyethanol, ethyl acetate, ethyl acrylate, ethylbenzene, furfuryl alcohol, n-hexane, 2-hexanone, 2-isopropoxyethanol, methanol, 1-methoxy-2-propanol, methyl acrylate, 3-methyl-1-butanol, methyl tertiary butyl ether, 4-metyl-2-pentanol, methyl methacrylate, 2-propanol, 2-propen-1-ol, 2-propoxyethanol, 1-propoxy-2-propanol, styrene, trichloromethane, toluene and m-xylene. In addition, a mixture of 2-methylbutyl acetate and n-pentyl acetate was tested. For most of the solvents, little or no percutaneous absorption data have been published. Lag times, steady-state fluxes and apparent permeability coefficients were obtained from the time courses of solvent appearance in the receptor medium, as measured by gas chromatography. The use of the same methodology and kind of skin resulted in small variability within experiments, underlining the need for consistent methodology for useful results for developing predictive models. Furthermore, a comparison of the neat and diluted data shows that water dilution affects all these variables and that the direction and magnitude of the effects vary between chemicals. This comparison strongly supports that prediction of percutaneous absorption of neat and water diluted chemicals requires different models.

Use of uncertainty factors by the European Commission Scientific Committee on Occupational Exposure Limits: a follow-up.

Decision on the safety margin, for instance by using uncertainty factors (UFs), is a key aspect in setting Occupational Exposure Limits (OELs). We analyzed the UFs in 128 OEL recommendations from the European Commission's Scientific Committee on Occupational Exposure Limits (SCOEL). We investigated factors expected to potentially influence the UFs, as well as a selection of factors that might influence how expert groups perceive quality or reliability of key studies. We extracted UFs explicitly stated in the recommendations (EUFs) and, when EUFs were missing, calculated an implicit safety margin (ISM) by dividing the point of departure (PoD) by the OEL. EUFs and ISMs were lower for recommendations based on human data than those based on animal data. EUFs and ISMs were also lower for No-Observed Adverse Effect Concentrations (NOAECs) than Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Concentrations (LOAECs). We saw no differences based on local vs systemic critical effects. Acute data resulted in lower EUFs and ISMs than subchronic. We saw no influence from status of key study (publication status, performer or funder), but high tonnage substances (1,000,000+ tonnes) have lower EUFs and ISMs than substances currently not registered under REACH. Although SCOEL methodology stated that UF should be documented, only 65 out of 128 OEL recommendations included an EUF. Indeed, the ratio of EUFs to ISMs even decreased from 1991-2003 to 2004-2017. Additionally, EUFs were, on average, 1.8 times higher than ISMs. We conclude that a more articulate framework for using UFs could enhance consistency and transparency of the SCOEL recommendations.

Comparing Data from the Poisons Information Centre with Employers' Accident Reports Reveal Under-Recognized Hazards at the Workplace.

Records of injuries and incidents provide an important basis for injury prevention related to hazardous substances at the workplace. The present study aimed to review available data on injuries and incidents involving hazardous substances and investigate how data from the Poisons Information Centre could complement the records of the Swedish Work Environment Authority. We found two major obstacles for using injury/incident data based on employers' mandatory reporting. First, it was not possible to quickly and reliably identify injuries caused by hazardous substances, and second, data identifying substances or products are not systematically included. For two out of five investigated injuries with lost working days likely due to chemical injuries, we could not identify substances and/or products involved. The records based on calls to the Poisons Information Centre allow better understanding of chemical hazards and products. Besides the large share of unidentified chemical hazards in the injury statistics, the most striking difference was found for cleaning agents. Cleaning agents were implicated in one-third of the occupational cases that the consulting Poisons Information Centre expert judged to pose a major risk and in need of immediate healthcare. Only one in 10 injuries with lost days reported by employers was related to this type of product. The identification of exposures and symptoms by the Poisons Information Centre allow recognition of chemicals with problematic occupational uses. Hence, these records may serve as an important complement to official injury statistics related to incidents with hazardous substances at work.

Does industry take the susceptible subpopulation of asthmatic individuals into consideration when setting derived no-effect levels?

Asthma, a chronic respiratory disease, can be aggravated by exposure to certain chemical irritants. The objectives were first to investigate the extent to which experimental observations on asthmatic subjects are taken into consideration in connection with the registration process under the EU REACH regulation, and second, to determine whether asthmatics are provided adequate protection by the derived no-effect levels (DNELs) for acute inhalation exposure. We identified substances for which experimental data on the pulmonary functions of asthmatics exposed to chemicals under controlled conditions are available. The effect concentrations were then compared with DNELs and other guideline and limit values. As of April 2015, only 2.6% of 269 classified irritants had available experimental data on asthmatics. Fourteen of the 22 identified substances with available data were fully registered under REACH and we retrieved 114 reliable studies related to these. Sixty-three of these studies, involving nine of the 14 substances, were cited by the REACH registrants. However, only 17 of the 114 studies, involving four substances, were regarded as key studies. Furthermore, many of the DNELs for acute inhalation were higher than estimated effect levels for asthmatics, i.e., lowest observed adverse effect concentrations or no-observed adverse effect concentrations, indicating low or no safety margin. We conclude that REACH registrants tend to disregard findings on asthmatics when deriving these DNELs. In addition, we found examples of DNELs, particularly among those derived for workers, which likely do not provide adequate protection for asthmatics. Copyright © 2016 The Authors Journal of Applied Toxicology Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Derived no-effect levels (DNELs) under the European chemicals regulation REACH--an analysis of long-term inhalation worker-DNELs presented by industry.

The European REACH regulation places responsibility for providing safety information, including derived no-effect levels (DNELs), on chemicals and chemical products on 'industry', i.e. manufacturers and importers. We compared long-term inhalation worker-DNELs (wDNELs) presented by industry with the corresponding Swedish occupational exposure limits (OELs), and for a subset, with wDNELs derived by us. Our wDNELs were derived using toxicological evaluations published by the Swedish Criteria Group and our interpretation of the REACH Guidance. On average, industry's wDNELs were the same as the Swedish OELs (median of wDNEL-OEL ratios: 0.98, n = 235). However, the variation was huge, the extremes being up to 450 times higher, and up to 230 times lower than the corresponding OEL. Nearly one-fifth of the wDNELs were ≥2 times higher and one-third ≥2 times lower than the OEL. No time trend was seen in the wDNEL/OEL ratios, suggesting that older OELs were not systematically higher than the more recent ones. Industry's wDNELs varied widely and were generally higher (median 4.2 times, up to 435 times higher, down to 13 times lower, n = 23) also compared to our wDNELs. Only five industry wDNELs were equal to or lower than ours. The choices of key studies, dose descriptors, and assessment factors all seemed to contribute to the discrepancies. We conclude that although the REACH guidance is detailed, many choices that will influence the wDNEL lack firm instructions. A major problem is that little advice is given on when and how to depart from default assessment factors.