CONCEPTS OF RISK AND SAFETY IN TOXIC SUBSTANCES REGULATION: A COMPARISON OF FRANCE AND THE U.S.

1980 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 394-403 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald Brickman ◽  
Sheila Jasonoff
Keyword(s):  
1999 ◽  
Vol 01 (03) ◽  
pp. 329-347 ◽  
Author(s):  
REBECCA A. EFROYMSON

The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) is the legislation used by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to regulate releases of genetically engineered microorganisms. The rule defining the scope of the notification requirements for releases of microbial products of biotechnology was published in April 1997. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) had some latitude regarding the extent to which various categories of microorganisms would be regulated, but the agency was constrained by requirements of TSCA and an interagency agreement about how to regulate products of biotechnology. This paper investigates the extent to which the scope of oversight is based on risk. A risk-based rule is defined as one where the reporting requirements are based on potential for exposure or expected adverse effects. The evolution of the rule is described, and risk-based components are discussed. In conclusion, the scope of oversight of microbial releases is determined to be based on risk to the extent that legislation and institutional constraints permit.


2001 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 175-187 ◽  
Author(s):  
Odelia Funke

This article explores long-term issues and problems that have seriously undermined the U.S. Chemical Testing Program established by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the Toxic Substances Control Act. This program is meant to gather information needed to protect human health and the environment from damaging exposure to toxic chemicals. Despite seemingly broad and impressive authority under the statute, there are a number of inherent difficulties, as well as substantial political constraints, that impede comprehensive oversight of chemicals in U.S. commerce. The article discusses several approaches that EPA has adopted to overcome statutory and political limitations and increase chemical testing information. The most recent and promising of these efforts has involved international negotiations to harmonize testing approaches with OECD nations and to cooperate on an agenda that will better share the testing burden on an international level.


Author(s):  
Joel A. Tickner

The system for regulating toxic substances in the United States is broken. It is disjointed and reactionary, lacking in information, authority, and primary prevention. The case study of bisphenol A (BPA) demonstrates a myriad of limitations with the way we evaluate, regulate, and manage toxic substances in society. The purpose of this chapter is to provide a brief overview of the current U.S. system for regulating toxic chemicals and to identify limits in that approach with particular emphasis on BPA. It provides an overview of some of the drivers shaping new approaches to chemicals regulation and management and a framework for designing more precautionary and solutions-stimulating policies in the future. The U.S. system for regulating toxic chemicals in production systems and products is relatively complex. Different types of chemicals are regulated in various ways in the U.S. system, depending on how that chemical is being used. For example, cosmetics, chemicals used in food applications, medical devices, and pharmaceuticals are regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act, and each of these types of chemical applications is regulated differently under the Act. For chemicals used in cosmetic products, the FDA has no premarket authority and can regulate a chemical ingredient only if it is mis­branded or adulterates the product. In the case of new food contact substances and uses of them (indirect food additives including chemicals that might leach out of packaging such as bottles), manufacturers are required to submit notifications, including safety data, to the FDA, except when a substance is previously regulated or considered “generally recognized as safe” because earlier evidence on that material did not indicate concerns. At the FDA, the highest evidentiary burdens are for medical devices and pharmaceuticals that have strong premarket testing requirements to ensure safety and efficacy. Chemicals in many consumer products, such as toys, are regulated by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) under the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act and the Federal Hazardous Substances Act.


Author(s):  
David Vogel

This chapter looks at American and European policies toward the risks of chemicals and hazardous substances. The 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) significantly strengthened American chemical regulations and contributed to the 1979 decision of the EU to both harmonize and strengthen its chemical regulations, though they remained weaker than those of the United States. While there has been no major statutory change in American chemical regulation since then, in 2006 the EU approved REACH—the Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals, which made European chemical regulations significantly more stringent and comprehensive than those of the United States. Meanwhile, risk assessments by the U.S. federal government do not consider the hazardous substances in electronics deposited in landfills as a threat to public health.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurel Berman

Multiple programs promote redevelopment of land reuse sites, which are environmentally impacted or potentially contaminated sites. Historically, such programs have focused primarily on economic development. However, public health is an important consideration to address not only sustainable redevelopment but also health inequity and disparities. The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry’s (ATSDR) Land Reuse Health Program is a special program to promote broad public health improvements through safe land reuse and redevelopment. Land reuse sites are virtually in every community in the U.S. and are a global problem. Brownfields are the greatest number of land reuse sites. With estimates of over 450,000 land reuse sites across the U.S., most communities suffer the burden of blight and contamination associated with these sites. ATSDR promotes and practices Healthfields Redevelopment: The safe reuse of environmentally distressed land to reduce exposures to contaminants and to improve overall health in the community. In this chapter, I highlight Navajo Nation Healthfields activities using ATSDR’s 5-step Land Reuse Strategy to Safely Reuse Land and Improve Health (5-step Land Reuse Model) and describe some of ATSDR’s Healthfields projects and related tools and resources for communities to create their own Healthfields practice.


Author(s):  
R. D. Heidenreich

This program has been organized by the EMSA to commensurate the 50th anniversary of the experimental verification of the wave nature of the electron. Davisson and Germer in the U.S. and Thomson and Reid in Britian accomplished this at about the same time. Their findings were published in Nature in 1927 by mutual agreement since their independent efforts had led to the same conclusion at about the same time. In 1937 Davisson and Thomson shared the Nobel Prize in physics for demonstrating the wave nature of the electron deduced in 1924 by Louis de Broglie.The Davisson experiments (1921-1927) were concerned with the angular distribution of secondary electron emission from nickel surfaces produced by 150 volt primary electrons. The motivation was the effect of secondary emission on the characteristics of vacuum tubes but significant deviations from the results expected for a corpuscular electron led to a diffraction interpretation suggested by Elasser in 1925.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document