Opinion of the Scientific Committee on health, environmental and emerging risks on the safety of titanium dioxide in toys.

The Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Health, Environmental and Emerging Risks advises the European Commission on whether the uses of titanium dioxide in toys and toy materials can be considered to be safe in light of the identified exposure, and the classification of titanium dioxide as carcinogenic category 2 after inhalation. Four toy products including casting kits, chalk, powder paints and white colour pencils containing various amounts of TiO2 as colouring agent were evaluated for inhalation risks. For the oral route, childrens' lip gloss/lipstick, finger paint and white colour pencils were evaluated. When it can be demonstrated with high certainty that no ultrafine fraction is present in pigmentary TiO2 preparations used in toys and toy materials, safe use with no or negligible risk for all products considered is indicated based on the exposure estimations of this Opinion. However, if an ultrafine fraction is assumed to be present, safe use is not indicated, except for white colour pencils.

Is the EU chemicals strategy for sustainability a green deal?

A fully integrated Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability (CSS) in respect of chemicals is crucial and must include: • An objective evaluation of the present situation including impacts of 'chemicals of concern' throughout their life cycle, that incorporates sustainability issues. • A framework that facilitates innovation of chemistry-based approaches to tackle each of the key sustainability issues. The EU CSS only addresses adverse impacts and mainly focusses on one aspect of risk assessment, the hazard to humans from individual industrial chemicals. The proposal removes consideration of the nature and amount of exposure, which is a critical determinant of risk. It can be presumed that this is solely to simplify, and hence speed up, regulatory decisions thereby enabling more chemicals to be assessed. The linkage of this proposed approach to address any of the major sustainability issues, such as environmental pollutants is obscure. For example, the well-recognised environmental problems caused by polymers such as plastics are not considered. The proposed change in the assessment methodology lacks any scientific justification and fails to address the sustainability issues the EU and the rest of the world are facing. The authors critically discuss a comprehensive innovative evaluation methodology for the impact of chemicals.

Conducting evaluations of evidence that are transparent, timely and can lead to health-protective actions.

BACKGROUND: In February 2021, over one hundred scientists and policy experts participated in a web-based Workshop to discuss the ways that divergent evaluations of evidence and scientific uncertainties are used to delay timely protection of human health and the environment from exposures to hazardous agents. The Workshop arose from a previous workshop organized by the European Environment Agency (EEA) in 2008 and which also drew on case studies from the EEA reports on 'Late Lessons from Early Warnings' (2001, 2013). These reports documented dozens of hazardous agents including many chemicals, for which risk reduction measures were delayed for decades after scientists and others had issued early and later warnings about the harm likely to be caused by those agents. RESULTS: Workshop participants used recent case studies including Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), Extremely Low Frequency - Electrical Magnetic Fields (ELF-EMF fields), glyphosate, and Bisphenol A (BPA) to explore myriad reasons for divergent outcomes of evaluations, which has led to delayed and inadequate protection of the public's health. Strategies to overcome these barriers must, therefore, at a minimum include approaches that 1) Make better use of existing data and information, 2) Ensure timeliness, 3) Increase transparency, consistency and minimize bias in evidence evaluations, and 4) Minimize the influence of financial conflicts of interest. CONCLUSION: The recommendations should enhance the production of "actionable evidence," that is, reliable evaluations of the scientific evidence to support timely actions to protect health and environments from exposures to hazardous agents. The recommendations are applicable to policy and regulatory settings at the local, state, federal and international levels.

Occupational exposure to Cr(VI) in Finland in 1980-2016 and related lung cancer risk assessment.

Occupational exposure to hexavalent chromium [Cr(VI)], a known lung carcinogen, remains a relevant concern. When performing exposure assessment for risk assessment, biomonitoring is an important tool, reflecting actual internal exposure of workers. Here, we present total urinary chromium (U-Cr) biomonitoring data from several occupational sectors, spanning 1980-2016 (n > 42,000). Based on these data, we estimated lifelong (40-year) occupational lung cancer risks in the Cr-plating and welding sectors. We used published regression formulas to relate internal (U-Cr) and external Cr(VI) inhalation exposures, allowing risk assessment based on a published lung cancer dose-response. Generally, measured U-Cr levels decreased considerably over the study period. The overall highest U-Cr P95 levels (representing realistic worst-case) were measured in the interval 1980-1989 in casters, maintenance workers and welders (40-45 µg/L). By the interval 2010-2016, the U-Cr P95 had decreased to ≤9.5 µg/L in all studied sectors. Lifelong external Cr(VI) exposure estimation for 1980-2019 was 0.16-0.32 mg/m3 x year for platers and 1.03 mg/m3 x year for welders. Worst-case lifelong lung cancer relative risk (RR) estimates were 1.28-1.56 for platers and 2.80 for welders; attributable risks (AR) were 22-36% for platers and 64% for welders. Uncertainties that may have impacted the risk assessment are discussed.

Framework for developing an exposure science curriculum as part of the European Exposure Science Strategy 2020-2030.

BACKGROUND: Evaluating and managing exposures to chemical, physical and biological stressors, which frequently interplay with psychological stressors as well as social and behavioural aspects, is crucial for protecting human and environmental health and transitioning towards a sustainable future. Advances in our understanding of exposure rely on input from well-trained exposure scientists. However, no education programmes in Europe are currently explicitly dedicated to cover the broader range of exposure science approaches, applications, stressors and receptors. OBJECTIVE: To address this challenge, a curriculum is needed that yields credible, well-defined career pathways in exposure science. METHODS: Needs and conditions for advancing exposure science education in Europe were identified. As a starting point for a way forward, harmonised learning outcomes for exposure science were defined at each level of the European Qualifications Framework. The course programme coordinators were recruited for three varying courses, with respect to the course level and the proportion of the curriculum dedicated to exposure science. These courses were assessed via our systematic course review procedure. Finally, strategic objectives and actions are proposed to build exposure science education programmes. RESULTS: The ISES Europe 'Education, Training and Communication' expert working group developed a framework for creating a viable exposure science curriculum. Harmonised learning outcomes were structured under eight learning levels, categorised by knowledge, skills and competence. Illustrative case studies demonstrated how education providers integrated these learning outcomes for their educational context and aligned the overall exposure science curriculum. CONCLUSIONS: The international recognition and adoption of exposure science education will enable advances in addressing global exposure science challenges for various stressors, from behavioural aspects from individual to population scale, and effective communication between exposure scientists and relevant stakeholders and policy makers, as part of the European Exposure Science Strategy 2020-2030.

Enhancing the use of exposure science across EU chemical policies as part of the European Exposure Science Strategy 2020-2030.

BACKGROUND: A scientific framework on exposure science will boost the multiuse of exposure knowledge across EU chemicals-related policies and improve risk assessment, risk management and communication across EU safety, security and sustainability domains. OBJECTIVE: To stimulate public and private actors to align and strengthen the cross-policy adoption of exposure assessment data, methods and tools across EU legislation. METHODS: By mapping and analysing the EU regulatory landscape making use of exposure information, policy and research challenges and key areas of action are identified and translated into opportunities enhancing policy and scientific efficiency. RESULTS: Identified key areas of actions are to develop a common scientific exposure assessment framework, supported by baseline acceptance criteria and a shared knowledge base enhancing exchangeability and acceptability of exposure knowledge within and across EU chemicals-related policies. Furthermore, such framework will improve communication and management across EU chemical safety, security and sustainability policies comprising sourcing, manufacturing and global trade of goods and waste management. In support of building such a common framework and its effective use in policy and industry, exposure science innovation needs to be better embedded along the whole policymaking cycle, and be integrated into companies' safety and sustainability management systems. This will help to systemically improve regulatory risk management practices. SIGNIFICANCE: This paper constitutes an important step towards the implementation of the EU Green Deal and its underlying policy strategies, such as the Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability.

A human biomonitoring (HBM) Global Registry Framework: Further advancement of HBM research following the FAIR principles.

Data generated by the rapidly evolving human biomonitoring (HBM) programmes are providing invaluable opportunities to support and advance regulatory risk assessment and management of chemicals in occupational and environmental health domains. However, heterogeneity across studies, in terms of design, terminology, biomarker nomenclature, and data formats, limits our capacity to compare and integrate data sets retrospectively (reuse). Registration of HBM studies is common for clinical trials; however, the study designs and resulting data collections cannot be traced easily. We argue that an HBM Global Registry Framework (HBM GRF) could be the solution to several of challenges hampering the (re)use of HBM (meta)data. The aim is to develop a global, host-independent HBM registry framework based on the use of harmonised open-access protocol templates from designing, undertaking of an HBM study to the use and possible reuse of the resulting HBM (meta)data. This framework should apply FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable) principles as a core data management strategy to enable the (re)use of HBM (meta)data to its full potential through the data value chain. Moreover, we believe that implementation of FAIR principles is a fundamental enabler for digital transformation within environmental health. The HBM GRF would encompass internationally harmonised and agreed open access templates for HBM study protocols, structured web-based functionalities to deposit, find, and access harmonised protocols of HBM studies. Registration of HBM studies using the HBM GRF is anticipated to increase FAIRness of the resulting (meta)data. It is also considered that harmonisation of existing data sets could be performed retrospectively. As a consequence, data wrangling activities to make data ready for analysis will be minimised. In addition, this framework would enable the HBM (inter)national community to trace new HBM studies already in the planning phase and their results once finalised. The HBM GRF could also serve as a platform enhancing communication between scientists, risk assessors, and risk managers/policy makers. The planned European Partnership for the Assessment of Risk from Chemicals (PARC) work along these lines, based on the experience obtained in previous joint European initiatives. Therefore, PARC could very well bring a first demonstration of first essential functionalities within the development of the HBM GRF.

Analysis of different preferences for the EU's regulatory options for endocrine disruptor identification criteria using argumentation theory.

What criteria are most suitable to identify endocrine disrupting substances (EDSs) for regulatory purposes in the EU? The results of the European Commission's public consultation, as part of the process to establish identification criteria for EDSs, show that different regulatory options are supported. Some respondents prefer an option including hazard characterization considerations, whereas others prefer an option that avoids these considerations and introduces several hazard-identification based weight-of-evidence categories. In this study, the argumentation underlying the different preferences for identification criteria are analyzed and compared using pragma-dialectical argumentation theory (PDAT). All responses of non-anonymous, national governments that submitted a response in English (n = 17) were included. Responses of other stakeholder organizations were included if a Google News search returned an opinionated presence in the media on the subject (n = 9). Five topical themes and 21 underlying issues were identified. The themes are 1) mechanistic understanding of EDSs, 2) regulatory considerations related to the identification of EDSs, 3) consistency with existing regulatory frameworks, and 4) evaluations of specific issues related to a category approach and 5) related to including potency. We argue that two overarching (implicit) 'advocacy coalitions' can be discerned, that adopted contrasting positions towards the identified themes and issues. Among these 'coalitions', there appears to be consensus about the necessity of having 'science-based' criteria, though different perspectives exist as to what the most accurate mechanistic understanding of EDSs entails. To move the discussion forward, we argue that a societal dialogue would be beneficial, where EDS science and regulation are discussed as interrelated themes.

Advice to the European Commission as Regards Type and Criteria for Comprehensive Studies to Be Requested From Manufacturers: The Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Health, Environmental, and Emerging Risks (SCHEER).

The European Commission has established a priority list of 15 additives contained in cigarettes and roll-your-own tobacco subject to enhanced reporting obligations. The European Union (EU) Tobacco Products Directive (TPD) prescribes that Member States shall require manufacturers and importers of tobacco products to carry out comprehensive studies on these additives to assess their contribution to any of the properties listed in Article 6 of the TPD: toxicity or addictiveness, characterizing flavor, inhalation facilitation, nicotine uptake, and carcinogenic, mutagenic, or toxic for reproduction. The Scientific Committee on Health, Environmental, and Emerging Risks (SCHEER) has provided guidance on the type and criteria for comprehensive studies, and on the most suitable methodologies to test these 15 tobacco additives as well as additives on future updated lists. The SCHEER proposes a stepwise strategy as the most pragmatic and efficient way to assess the effects of tobacco additives. In addition to proposing specific steps and tests to be considered by industry, some general criteria were also identified such as no comparative testing (testing cigarettes with and without the additive) and no animal studies. As tobacco additives have no benefits for health, but rather may promote use of and addiction to an extremely toxic product, a risk-benefit analysis is not the appropriate paradigm for assessing the additive. When comprehensive studies confirm that additives have any of the properties listed in Article 6 of the TPD, regulatory actions should be considered. If uncertainties cannot be solved by comprehensive studies, the SCHEER recommends that the assessors consider the worst-case evaluation. IMPLICATIONS: In this article, the SCHEER proposes a stepwise strategy to assess (1) the toxic and addictive effects, (2) the characterizing flavor, and (3) facilitating inhalation properties of tobacco additives. The proposed steps and tests provide guidance to (1) Member State on which comprehensive studies should be requested and (2) tobacco industry on which strategy of testing should be applied to address the request and to prepare reports to be sent to the relevant authorities for the evaluation of tobacco additives "safety" to comply with the Tobacco Products Directive 2014/40/EU.

Building a European exposure science strategy.

Exposure information is a critical element in various regulatory and non-regulatory frameworks in Europe and elsewhere. Exposure science supports to ensure safe environments, reduce human health risks, and foster a sustainable future. However, increasing diversity in regulations and the lack of a professional identity as exposure scientists currently hamper developing the field and uptake into European policy. In response, we discuss trends, and identify three key needs for advancing and harmonizing exposure science and its application in Europe. We provide overarching building blocks and define six long-term activities to address the identified key needs, and to iteratively improve guidelines, tools, data, and education. More specifically, we propose creating European networks to maximize synergies with adjacent fields and identify funding opportunities, building common exposure assessment approaches across regulations, providing tiered education and training programmes, developing an aligned and integrated exposure assessment framework, offering best practices guidance, and launching an exposure information exchange platform. Dedicated working groups will further specify these activities in a consistent action plan. Together, these elements form the foundation for establishing goals and an action roadmap for successfully developing and implementing a 'European Exposure Science Strategy' 2020-2030, which is aligned with advances in science and technology.

Human biomonitoring in health risk assessment in Europe: Current practices and recommendations for the future.

Human biomonitoring (HBM) is an important tool to survey the internal exposure of humans which represents the real life chemical body burden to chemicals and/or their metabolites. It results from total exposure to chemical substances from different sources and via different routes. These substances may be regulated under different legislative frameworks on chemicals (e.g., environmental, occupational, food safety etc). In occupational health, HBM has long traditions to control the exposures at workplaces. By providing accurate data on internal exposure, HBM data can improve human health risk assessment (RA) for both the general population and workers. Although the past few years have shown good examples on the use of HBM in the RA of chemicals, there is still quite some work to be done to improve its use in a regulatory RA. Under the scope of the European Human Biomonitoring Initiative (project HBM4EU, 2017-2021), the current study reviews the state-of-the-art of HBM use in chemicals RA with a special focus in Europe, and attempts to identify hurdles and challenges faced by regulators. To gather information on the use of HBM, including the availability of guidance on how to use it in RA, the RA schemes applied by different European or international organizations were analysed. Examples of such use were identified for a few selected groups of chemicals of concern for human health. In addition, we present the results of a survey, aimed at collecting information from national regulatory risk assessors on their day-to-day RA practices, the use of HBM data, and the obstacles and challenges related to their use. The results evidenced and explained some of the current obstacles of using HBM data in RA. These included the lack of HBM guidance values or biomonitoring equivalents (BEs), limited toxicokinetic information to support the interpretation of HBM data and, in the occupational health and safety (OSH) field, the lack of legal enforcement. Therefore, to support the integration of HBM in regulatory RA, we recommend, on one hand, the elaboration of a EU level guidance on the use of HBM in RA and, on the other hand, the continuation of research efforts to integrate HBM with new RA approaches using in vitro/in silico data and Adverse Outcome Pathways (AOPs).

Why Do Countries Regulate Environmental Health Risks Differently? A Theoretical Perspective.

Why do countries regulate, or prefer to regulate, environmental health risks such as radiofrequency electromagnetic fields and endocrine disruptors differently? A wide variety of theories, models, and frameworks can be used to help answer this question, though the resulting answer will strongly depend on the theoretical perspective that is applied. In this theoretical review, we will explore eight conceptual frameworks, from different areas of science, which will offer eight different potential explanations as to why international differences occur in environmental health risk management. We are particularly interested in frameworks that could shed light on the role of scientific expertise within risk management processes. The frameworks included in this review are the Risk Assessment Paradigm, research into the roles of experts as policy advisors, the Psychometric Paradigm, the Cultural Theory of Risk, participatory approaches to risk assessment and risk management, the Advocacy Coalition Framework, the Social Amplification of Risk Framework, and Hofstede's Model of National Cultures. We drew from our knowledge and experiences regarding a diverse set of academic disciplines to pragmatically assemble a multidisciplinary set of frameworks. From the ideas and concepts offered by the eight frameworks, we derive pertinent questions to be used in further empirical work and we present an overarching framework to depict the various links that could be drawn between the frameworks.

Comparative, collaborative, and integrative risk governance for emerging technologies.

Various emerging technologies challenge existing governance processes to identify, assess, and manage risk. Though the existing risk-based paradigm has been essential for assessment of many chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear technologies, a complementary approach may be warranted for the early-stage assessment and management challenges of high uncertainty technologies ranging from nanotechnology to synthetic biology to artificial intelligence, among many others. This paper argues for a risk governance approach that integrates quantitative experimental information alongside qualitative expert insight to characterize and balance the risks, benefits, costs, and societal implications of emerging technologies. Various articles in scholarly literature have highlighted differing points of how to address technological uncertainty, and this article builds upon such knowledge to explain how an emerging technology risk governance process should be driven by a multi-stakeholder effort, incorporate various disparate sources of information, review various endpoints and outcomes, and comparatively assess emerging technology performance against existing conventional products in a given application area. At least in the early stages of development when quantitative data for risk assessment remain incomplete or limited, such an approach can be valuable for policymakers and decision makers to evaluate the impact that such technologies may have upon human and environmental health.

Scientific Opinion on Risk Assessment of Synthetic Biology.

In 2013, three Scientific Committees of the European Commission (EC) drafted Scientific Opinions on synthetic biology that provide an operational definition and address risk assessment methodology, safety aspects, environmental risks, knowledge gaps, and research priorities. These Opinions contribute to the international discussions on the risk governance for synthetic biology developments.

OSIRIS, a quest for proof of principle for integrated testing strategies of chemicals for four human health endpoints.

Chemical substances policies in Europe are aiming towards chemical safety and at the same time a reduction in animal testing. These goals are alleged to be reachable by mining as many relevant data as possible, evaluate these data with regard to validity, reliability and relevance, and use of these data in so-called Integrated Testing Strategies (ITS). This paper offers an overview of four human health endpoints that were part of the EU-funded OSIRIS project, aiming to develop ITS fit for the EU chemicals legislation REACH. The endpoints considered cover their categorical as well as continuous characteristics: skin sensitisation, repeated dose toxicity, mutagenicity and carcinogenicity. Detailed papers are published elsewhere in this volume. The stepwise ITS approach developed takes advantage of existing information, groups information about similar substances and integrates exposure considerations. The different and possibly contradictory information is weighted and the respective uncertainties taken into account in a weight of evidence (WoE) approach. In case of data gaps, the ITS proposes the most appropriate method to acquire the missing information. Each building block for the ITS, i.e. each in vivo test, in vitro test, (Q)SAR model or human evidence, is evaluated with regard to quality.

Evaluation of the Daphnia magna reproduction test for detecting endocrine disruptors.

The Daphnia 21 d reproduction test is considered as a comprehensive and decisive test in the OECD Conceptual Framework for testing and assessment of endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs). However, how to interpret results of the Daphnia 21 d reproduction test for identification, risk assessment and testing strategy of EDCs remains an unsolved issue. This study analysed a total number of 135 published studies encompassing 86 known EDCs and non-EDCs with different modes of action. Our results show that the majority of effects on apical endpoints (survival, molting, growth, time to reproductive maturity, brood size, the number of broods, and the total number of offspring) do not seem to be EDC-specific. In contrast, the endpoint sex ratio is likely specific to juvenile hormones and their mimics. Variability is quantified for three most reported endpoints survival, the total number of offspring and sex ratio. Quantification of the endpoint sensitivity shows that the sensitivity of the sex ratio is lower than that of the total number of offspring. The Daphnia 21 d reproduction test gives insufficient information to conclude if a substance is an EDC or not. EDCs that are potent in assays in vitro may not be potent in the Daphnia 21 d reproduction test. We conclude that the Daphnia 21 d reproduction test is important for deriving No Observed Effect Concentrations for risk assessment but may produce false negatives in identification of EDCs when used on its own. A targeted testing strategy for selection of species, tests, and endpoints is suggested for identifying EDCs.

Correcting a fundamental error in greenhouse gas accounting related to bioenergy.

Many international policies encourage a switch from fossil fuels to bioenergy based on the premise that its use would not result in carbon accumulation in the atmosphere. Frequently cited bioenergy goals would at least double the present global human use of plant material, the production of which already requires the dedication of roughly 75% of vegetated lands and more than 70% of water withdrawals. However, burning biomass for energy provision increases the amount of carbon in the air just like burning coal, oil or gas if harvesting the biomass decreases the amount of carbon stored in plants and soils, or reduces carbon sequestration. Neglecting this fact results in an accounting error that could be corrected by considering that only the use of 'additional biomass' - biomass from additional plant growth or biomass that would decompose rapidly if not used for bioenergy - can reduce carbon emissions. Failure to correct this accounting flaw will likely have substantial adverse consequences. The article presents recommendations for correcting greenhouse gas accounts related to bioenergy.

Evaluation of the fish short term reproduction assay for detecting endocrine disrupters.

In a fish testing strategy, positive results of the fish short term reproduction assay (FSTR), often trigger a definitive test like the fish sexual development test (FSDT) or the fish full life cycle test (FFLC), entailing ethical and economic problems. This study analysed 137 studies encompassing 35 chemicals with different modes of actions (MOAs). Variability is quantified for MOA endpoints vitellogenin (VTG) and secondary sex characteristics (SSCs) as well as for apical endpoints. Two MOA endpoints could indicate estrogenic, anti-estrogenic, androgenic, anti-androgenic and steroidogenesis activities. Great variability, however, has been observed for chemicals with anti-androgenic and steroidogenesis activities, suggesting that TG229/230 may not be sensitive enough to detect these types of chemicals and may produce false negatives. Changes in apical endpoints like fecundity are not limited to endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs). Non-EDCs could induce the similar effects on these apical endpoints. If elucidating MOA is needed, targeted in vitro MOA tests are suggested. Positive in vitro MOA results trigger a definitive test, which could be used for confirmation of the MOA in vivo and for deriving a no observed effect concentration (NOEC). Based on positive MOA results of TG229, a definitive test such as the FSDT or the FFLC is still needed, because the current TG229 has limitation on the derivation of a NOEC. An extended TG229 with more power to detect reproduction effects, as recently proposed in the OECD test guideline program, would improve the possibility to derive a NOEC and increase its usefulness in risk assessment.