Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 24
Filtrar
1.
Inj Prev ; 27(2): 172-183, 2021 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32371468

RESUMO

The availability of data on consumer products-related accidents and injuries is of interest to a wide range of stakeholders, such as consumer product safety and injury prevention policymakers, market surveillance authorities, consumer organisations, standardisation organisations, manufacturers and the public. While the amount of information available and potentially of use for product safety is considerable in some European Union (EU) countries, its usability at EU level is difficult due to high fragmentation of the data sources, the diversity of data collection methods and increasing data protection concerns. To satisfy the policy need for more timely information on consumer product-related incidents, apart from injury data that have been historically collected by the public health sector, a number of 'alternative' data sources were assessed as potential sources of interest. This study explores the opportunities for enhancing the availability of data of consumer product-related injuries, arising from selected existing and 'alternative' data sources, widely present in Europe, such as firefighters' and poison centres' records, mortality statistics, consumer complaints, insurance companies' registers, manufacturers' incident registers and online news sources. These data sources, coupled with the use of IT technologies, such as interlinking by remote data access, could fill in the existing information gap. Strengths and weaknesses of selected data sources, with a view to support a common data platform, are evaluated and presented. Conducting the study relied on the literature review, extensive use of the surveys, interviews, workshops with experts and online data-mining pilot study.


Assuntos
Acidentes , Saúde Pública , Europa (Continente) , União Europeia , Humanos , Projetos Piloto
2.
EFSA J ; 22(4): e8721, 2024 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38585220

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the proposed modification of the terms of the authorisation regarding the maximum inclusion level of a feed additive consisting of 4-hydroxy-2,5-dimethylfuran-3(2H)-one for cats and dogs. 4-Hydroxy-2,5-dimethylfuran-3(2H)-one is currently authorised for use as a sensory additive (functional group: flavouring compounds) for cats and dogs at a recommended maximum content of 5 mg/kg complete feed. The applicant is requesting a modification of the authorisation to increase the recommended maximum content of the additive up to 25 mg/kg complete feed for cats and dogs. Based on the toxicological data available, the FEEDAP Panel concludes that 4-hydroxy-2,5-dimethylfuran-3(2H)-one is safe for dogs at 25 mg/kg feed and for cats at 18 mg/kg feed. The additive is irritant to skin, eyes and to the respiratory tract and is a skin sensitiser. No further demonstration of efficacy is necessary.

3.
EFSA J ; 22(3): e8644, 2024 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38469360

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for renewal of authorisation of sodium bisulphate (SBS) as a feed additive for all terrestrial animal species (category: technological additive; functional group: preservative), and for all terrestrial animal species other than cats, mink, pets and other non-food-producing animals (category: technological additive; functional group: acidity regulator). EFSA has also been asked to assess the new use of the product as an acidity regulator and flavouring compound in all pets and other non-food-producing animals except aquatic animals. The applicant provided evidence that the additive currently in the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. There is no evidence that would lead the FEEDAP Panel to reconsider its previous conclusions. Thus, the Panel concluded that the additive remains safe for all terrestrial animal species, consumer and the environment under the authorised conditions of use. The FEEDAP Panel considers that the proposed new use would not introduce risks not already considered in the previous assessment and therefore the same conclusions on all terrestrial animal species, consumers of products from animals fed the additive and the environment would apply. Regarding user safety, the additive is irritant to the skin, eyes and the respiratory tract, and should be considered a skin and respiratory sensitiser. There is no need to assess the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation. The Panel considers that the additive has the potential to be efficacious as an acidity regulator and sensory additive (flavouring compound) in feed for pet and non-food-producing animals (except aquatic animals).

4.
EFSA J ; 22(3): e8614, 2024 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38464413

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of the additive based on fumonisin esterase (Free Yeast® F), produced with a genetically modified strain of Komagataella phaffii. The additive is categorised as a technological feed additive, for the reduction of the contamination of feed by mycotoxins and intended for use in all pigs species (piglets, pigs for fattening, sows and minor growing and reproductive porcine species). It was shown that the production strain and its recombinant genes are not present in the additive. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive is safe for weaned and suckling piglets and pigs for fattening, and all minor growing porcine species up to 60 U/kg complete feed. No conclusions can be drawn on the safety of the additive in sows. The use of the additive in animal nutrition is of no concern for consumer safety. The additive is dust-free, and therefore, respiratory sensitisation/irritation is unlikely. The additive is non-irritant to the eyes and the skin. No conclusion could be made on skin sensitisation. The use of the additive as a feed additive is considered safe for the environment. The Panel concluded that the additive is efficacious as technological feed additive for the reduction of feed contamination by fumonisins, when used at the minimum recommended concentration of 60 U/kg. This conclusion can be extrapolated to all growing and reproductive pigs and other minor porcine species.

5.
EFSA J ; 22(4): e8752, 2024 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38634012

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of vitamin B12 (cyanocobalamin) produced by fermentation with a non-genetically modified strain of Ensifer adhaerens (CGMCC 21299), when used as a nutritional additive for all animal species. No viable cells or DNA of the production strain were detected in the additive. Therefore, cyanocobalamin produced by fermentation with E. adhaerens CGMCC 21299 does not raise safety concerns as regards to the production strain. The Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed concluded that cyanocobalamin produced by fermentation with E. adhaerens CGMCC 21299 is considered safe for all animal species, for the consumers and the environment. Due to the presence of nickel, the additive is considered a skin and respiratory sensitiser. Inhalation and dermal exposure are considered a risk. Due to the lack of data, the Panel could not conclude on the potential of the additive to be an eye irritant. Cyanocobalamin produced by fermentation with E. adhaerens CGMCC 21299 is effective in meeting animal's nutritional requirements when administered via feed.

6.
EFSA J ; 22(4): e8627, 2024 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38601869

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of the selenised yeast (inactivated) Saccharomyces cerevisiae CCTCC M 2022402 (Plexomin® Se 3000, available in two forms: 'granules' and 'micro') as a nutritional feed additive for all animal species. Based on a tolerance-efficacy trial, the FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive is safe for chickens for fattening at proposed conditions of use and this conclusion can be extrapolated to all animal species. In the absence of deposition data in all animal species and products, the FEEDAP Panel cannot conclude on the safety for the consumer. Plexomin® Se 3000 (granules) is dust-free; therefore, the exposure through inhalation is unlikely. Plexomin® Se 3000 (micro) presents a risk by inhalation. Both forms of the additive (granules and micro) are considered as respiratory sensitisers. Due to the lack of data, no conclusions can be drawn on the dermal and eye irritation potential of Plexomin® Se 3000 (granules). Plexomin® Se 3000 (micro) is not irritant to the skin and the eyes. No conclusions can be drawn on the potential of both forms of the additive to be dermal sensitisers. The use of the additive in animal nutrition is considered safe for the environment. The additive is an efficacious source of selenium in feedingstuffs for all animal species.

7.
EFSA J ; 21(12): e8459, 2023 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38099052

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of a new preparation of zinc-l-selenomethionine, with selenium content of 4%, as a nutritional feed additive for all animal species. Zinc-l-selenomethionine is already authorised for use in all animal species (3b818). Current authorisation defines the additive as 'Solid preparation of zinc-l-selenomethionine with a selenium content of 1-2 g/kg'. The applicant developed a new preparation of zinc-l-selenomethionine containing a minimum of 40 g Se/kg and seeks to modify the current authorisation. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the newly proposed preparation is considered safe for all animal species. The FEEDAP Panel recommends adding, to the currently existing authorisation, a new preparation (40-46 g Se/kg) and not the range proposed by the applicant (1-46 g Se/kg), since no characterisation data on the intermediate preparation range (from 2 to 40 g Se/kg) have been provided. The use of the new preparation (minimum 40 g Se/kg) of zinc-l-selenomethionine in animal nutrition is of no concern for consumer safety. The newly proposed preparation presents a risk by inhalation; it is not irritant to eyes or skin. No conclusion can be reached regarding dermal sensitisation. The previous conclusion by the Panel on the safety for the environment remains unchanged. The Panel concluded that the modification request has no impact on efficacy.

8.
EFSA J ; 21(1): e07714, 2023 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36643904

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the efficacy of ferrous lysinate sulfate for all animal species. The safety of the additive for the target species, consumer, user and the environment has already been assessed previously, however the efficacy remained inconclusive due to limitations in the study with chickens for fattening. In the present assessment, the applicant submitted a new efficacy study in weaned piglets. After the assessment of the new data submitted by the applicant, the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the efficacy of ferrous lysinate sulfate in weaned piglets.

9.
EFSA J ; 21(6): e08077, 2023 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37313318

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for the renewal of authorisation of thaumatin as a sensory additive (flavouring compound) for all animal species. The applicant requested a change in the authorising regulation for the minimum content of nitrogen and protein in the specification of the additive. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) confirms that the use of thaumatin under the current authorised conditions of use is safe for the target species, the consumers and the environment. This conclusion can be extended to the newly proposed specification. Due to its proteinaceous nature, the additive is considered to be a respiratory sensitiser. Thaumatin is not irritant to the eyes and the skin. In the absence of data, no conclusion on skin sensitisation could be made. The proposed modification of the specification of the additive is not considered to have an impact on the efficacy of thaumatin.

10.
EFSA J ; 21(12): e8460, 2023 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38094106

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the efficacy of copper(II)-betaine as a nutritional additive for all animal species and on the safety for the marine sediment when the additive is used in sea cages. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the risk to the marine sediment is acceptable when the additive is used in sea cages. The additional statistical analysis of the results of the efficacy study already assessed in the previous opinion did not allow the Panel to conclude on the efficacy of the additive.

11.
EFSA J ; 21(9): e08250, 2023 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37781416

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP Panel) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of iron(II)-betaine complex as a nutritional feed additive for all animal species. Based on the results of a tolerance study carried out in chickens the FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive is safe for chickens for fattening when used up to the current maximum authorised levels of iron in feed; this conclusion was extrapolated to all animal species and categories at the respective maximum iron levels in complete feed authorised in the European Union. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the use of the iron(II)-betaine complex in animal nutrition at the maximum iron levels authorised for the animal species poses no concern to the safety of consumers. The additive is not a skin irritant, but it is an irritant to the eyes. Due to the traces of nickel, the additive is considered to be a respiratory and skin sensitiser. Regarding the safety for the environment, the use of the additive in feed for terrestrial animals, land-based and sea cages aquaculture is considered safe under the proposed conditions of use. Based on the deposition of iron in edible tissues/organs in chickens for fattening, the FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive is a source of bioavailable iron, comparable to the standard inorganic iron source, and therefore, the additive is efficacious in meeting the birds iron requirements. This conclusion can be extrapolated to all animal species and categories.

12.
EFSA J ; 21(4): e07972, 2023 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37089186

RESUMO

The vitamin B12 (in the form of cyanocobalamin) under assessment is produced by fermentation with Ensifer adhaerens CGMCC 19596 and it is intended to be used as a nutritional additive for all animal species. Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of cyanocobalamin, produced by fermentation with E. adhaerens CGMCC 19596. Cyanocobalamin produced by other strains of E. adhaerens is already authorised for use in animal species. ■■■■■ However no viable cells nor DNA of the production strain were detected in the additive. Therefore, cyanocobalamin produced by E. adhaerens CGMCC 19596 does not raise safety concerns as regards to the production strain. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that cyanocobalamin produced by fermentation with E. adhaerens CGMCC 19596 is considered safe for all animal species. The use of cyanocobalamin in animal nutrition is of no concern for consumer safety. Cyanocobalamin is non-irritant to skin and non-irritant to eyes. No conclusions could be drawn on the potential of the additive to be a skin sensitiser. The potential endotoxin activity of the additive is unlikely to represent a hazard for users. The use of the additive under assessment in animal nutrition is considered safe for the environment. Cyanocobalamin produced by E. adhaerens CGMCC 19596 is effective in meeting animal's nutritional requirements when administered via feed.

13.
EFSA J ; 21(10): e08342, 2023 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37886608

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for the renewal of the authorisation of dicopper chloride trihydroxide as a nutritional feed additive. The additive is currently authorised for use in all animal species (3b409). The applicant is requesting a modification in the current authorising specification: (i) replacing the alpha crystal form paratacamite with clinoatacamite; (ii) removing the ratio between crystal polymorphs from the authorising specification; (iii) changing the minimum for particles below 50 µm from 1% to 5%. The FEEDAP Panel considers that the proposed modifications do not introduce concern for the safety for the target species and that the additive remains safe for the target species and the consumers when used up to the maximum authorised levels. Regarding the safety for the environment, the use of the additive in feed for terrestrial animals and land-based aquaculture is considered safe under the proposed conditions of use. The data available do not allow the FEEDAP Panel to reach a conclusion on the safety of the additive for marine sediment when it is used in sea cages. The additive is not corrosive to skin, but is an eye and skin irritant. Due to the nickel presence, it is considered a skin and respiratory sensitiser. There is no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.

14.
EFSA J ; 21(10): e08362, 2023 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37886611

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of manganese(II)-betaine complex as a nutritional feed additive for all animal species and categories. Based on the tolerance study performed in chickens, the FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive is safe for chickens for fattening when used up to the maximum proposed level of manganese in feed; this conclusion was extrapolated to all animal species and categories at the corresponding maximum manganese levels in complete feed (100 mg Mn/kg feed for fish and 150 mg Mn/kg feed for all other animal species). The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the use of additive in animal nutrition does not represent a concern for consumer safety or for the environment. The additive is irritant to the eyes, but not irritant to skin. Owing to the presence of nickel the additive is considered to be a dermal and respiratory sensitiser. The Panel concluded that the additive is efficacious as a nutritional additive for all animal species under the proposed conditions of use.

15.
EFSA J ; 21(12): e8458, 2023 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38107374

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for the renewal of the authorisation of zinc chloride hydroxide monohydrate as a nutritional feed additive for all animal species (3b609). The applicant reported changes in the production process and requested a change in the specification of the additive. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) confirms that the use of the additive under the current authorised conditions of use is safe for the target species and the consumers. The use of the additive in animal nutrition at the proposed use levels for the terrestrial species and land-based aquaculture systems is considered safe for the environment. The FEEDAP Panel cannot conclude on the safety of the additive for marine sediment compartment, when it is used in sea cages. The additive is an eye irritant, but not irritant to the skin and not a skin sensitiser. The exposure through inhalation is likely, but in the absence of data, the Panel is not in a position to conclude on the risk of exposure by inhalation. There was no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.

16.
EFSA J ; 21(2): e07817, 2023 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36846392

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP Panel) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of a copper(II)-betaine complex as nutritional feed additive for all animal species. Based on the results of a tolerance study carried out in chicken, the FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive is safe for chickens for fattening when used up to the current maximum authorised levels of copper in feed; this conclusion was extrapolated to all animal species and categories at the respective maximum copper levels in complete feed authorised in the European Union. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the use of the copper(II)-betaine complex in animal nutrition at the maximum copper levels authorised for the animal species poses no concern to the safety of consumers. Regarding the safety for the environment, the use of the additive in feed for terrestrial animals and land-based aquaculture is considered safe under proposed conditions of use. The data available do not allow the conclusion to be made on the safety of the additive for marine sediment when it is used in sea cages. The additive is not a skin irritant, but it is an irritant to the eyes. Due to the traces of nickel, the additive is considered to be a respiratory and skin sensitiser. The Panel could not conclude on the efficacy of the product.

17.
EFSA J ; 21(2): e07819, 2023 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36824682

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of a zinc(II)-betaine complex as nutritional additive for all animal species. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that the additive is safe for chickens for fattening. This conclusion could be extrapolated to all animal species and categories provided that the maximum authorised levels in the EU for total zinc in feed are not exceeded. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the use of the zinc(II)-betaine complex in animal nutrition is of no concern for consumer safety provided that the maximum authorised total zinc levels in feed are respected. The additive is considered to be a skin and respiratory sensitiser due to the presence of nickel; it is irritant to the eyes, but not to the skin. The use of the additive in animal nutrition for terrestrial animals and land-based aquaculture at the proposed use levels is considered safe for terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. The available data do not allow the conclusion to be made on the safety of the additive for the marine sediment when it is used in sea cages. Based on the deposition of zinc in edible tissues/organs in chickens for fattening, the FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive is a source of bioavailable zinc, comparable to the standard inorganic zinc source, and therefore, the additive is efficacious in meeting the birds zinc requirements. This conclusion can be extrapolated to all animal species and categories.

18.
EFSA J ; 21(1): e07696, 2023 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36643906

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for the renewal of authorisation of ammonium chloride (Amoklor™) as a zootechnical additive for all ruminants, dogs and cats and its extension of use in sows for urinary health. The applicant provided evidence that the additive currently in the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. There is no new evidence that would lead the FEEDAP Panel to reconsider its previous conclusions. Thus, the Panel concludes that the additive remains safe for ruminants other than lambs for fattening, lambs for fattening, cats and dogs, consumers and the environment under the current authorised conditions of use. Inhalation exposure of the additive is considered very likely. Amoklor™ should be considered a potential respiratory sensitiser but not a skin sensitiser. The additive is not irritant to the skin, but the Panel could not conclude on its eye irritation potential. The present application for renewal of the authorisation does not include a proposal for amending or supplementing the conditions of the original authorisation that would have an impact on the efficacy of the additive. Therefore, there was no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation. Regarding the extension of use in sows, the FEEDAP Panel concludes that the additive is safe and efficacious for sows at the inclusion level of 5,000 mg/kg feedingstuffs from week 9th to 11th of gestation and from week 15th of gestation to 1st of lactation.

19.
Environ Int ; 101: 27-45, 2017 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28161204

RESUMO

Flame retardants (FRs) are a diverse group of chemicals used as additives in a wide range of products to inhibit, suppress, or delay ignition and to prevent the spread of fire. Halogenated FRs (HFRs) are widely used because of their low impact on other material properties and the low loading levels necessary to meet the required flame retardancy. Health and environmental hazards associated with some halogenated FRs have driven research for identifying safer alternatives. A variety of halogen-free FRs are available on the market, including organic (phosphorus and nitrogen based chemicals) and inorganic (metals) materials. Multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNT) have been demonstrated to act as an effective/synergistic co-additive in some FR applications and could thereby contribute to reducing the loading of FRs in products and improving their performance. As part of the FP7 project DEROCA we carried out a chemical alternatives assessment (CAA). This is a methodology for identifying, comparing and selecting safer alternatives to chemicals of concern based on criteria for categorising human and environmental toxicity as well as environmental fate. In the project we assessed the hazard data of different halogen-free FRs to be applied in 5 industrial and consumer products and here we present the results for MWCNT, aluminium diethylphosphinate, aluminium trihydroxide, N-alkoxy hindered amines and red phosphorus compared to the HFR decabromodiphenylether. We consulted the REACH guidance, the criteria of the U.S.-EPA Design for Environment (DfE) and the GreenScreen® Assessment to assess and compare intrinsic properties affecting the hazard potential. A comparison/ranking of exposure reference values such as Derived No Effect Levels (DNELs) showed that FRs of concern are not identified by a low DNEL. A comparison based on hazard designations according to the U.S.-EPA DfE and GreenScreen® for human health endpoints, aquatic toxicity and environmental fate showed that the major differences between FRs of concern and their proposed alternatives are the potential for bioaccumulation and CMR (carcinogenic, mutagenic or reprotoxic) effects. As most alternatives are inorganic chemicals, persistence (alone) is not a suitable criterion. From our experiences in carrying out a CAA we conclude: i) REACH registration dossiers provide a comprehensive source of hazard information for an alternative assessment. It is important to consider that the presented data is subject to changes and its quality is variable. ii) Correct identification of the chemicals is crucial to retrieve the right data. This can be challenging for mixtures, reaction products or nanomaterials or when only trade names are available. iii) The quality of the data and the practice on how to fill data gaps can have a huge impact on the results and conclusions. iv) Current assessment criteria have mainly been developed for organic chemicals and create challenges when applied to inorganic solids, including nanomaterials. It is therefore crucial to analyse and report uncertainties for each decision making step.


Assuntos
Poluentes Ambientais/toxicidade , Retardadores de Chama/toxicidade , Nanotubos de Carbono/química , Qualidade de Produtos para o Consumidor , Humanos , Medição de Risco
20.
Environ Toxicol Chem ; 36(12): 3463-3470, 2017 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28671290

RESUMO

The scientific consensus model USEtox® has been developed since 2003 under the auspices of the United Nations Environment Programme-Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry Life Cycle Initiative as a harmonized approach for characterizing human and freshwater toxicity in life cycle assessment and other comparative assessment frameworks. Using physicochemical substance properties, USEtox quantifies potential human toxicity and freshwater ecotoxicity impacts by combining environmental fate, exposure, and toxicity effects information, considering multimedia fate and multipathway exposure processes. The main source to obtain substance properties for USEtox 1.01 and 2.0 is the Estimation Program Interface (EPI Suite™) from the US Environmental Protection Agency. However, since the development of the original USEtox substance databases, new chemical regulations have been enforced in Europe, such as the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) and the Plant Protection Products regulations. These regulations require that a chemical risk assessment for humans and the environment is performed before a chemical is placed on the European market. Consequently, additional physicochemical property data and new toxicological endpoints are now available for thousands of chemical substances. The aim of the present study was to explore the extent to which the new available data can be used as input for USEtox-especially for application in environmental footprint studies-and to discuss how this would influence the quantification of fate and exposure factors. Initial results show that the choice of data source and the parameters selected can greatly influence fate and exposure factors, leading to potentially different rankings and relative contributions of substances to overall human toxicity and ecotoxicity impacts. Moreover, it is crucial to discuss the relevance of the exposure factor for freshwater ecotoxicity impacts, particularly for persistent highly adsorbing and bioaccumulating substances. Environ Toxicol Chem 2017;36:3463-3470. © 2017 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of SETAC.


Assuntos
Ecotoxicologia/métodos , Poluentes Ambientais/análise , Substâncias Perigosas/análise , Bases de Dados Factuais , Ecossistema , Poluentes Ambientais/toxicidade , Água Doce/química , Substâncias Perigosas/toxicidade , Humanos , Modelos Teóricos , Medição de Risco , Poluentes da Água/análise , Poluentes da Água/toxicidade
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA