scholarly journals Investigation on Combined Inhalation Exposure Scenarios to Biocidal Mixtures: Biocidal and Household Chemical Products in South Korea

Toxics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sunmi Kim ◽  
Myungwon Seo ◽  
Minju Na ◽  
Jongwoon Kim

Global regulations of biocides have been continuously enhanced for protecting human health and the environment from potentially harmful biocidal products. Such regulations consider the combined toxicity caused by mixture components in a biocidal product of which approval and authorization are to be enhanced. Although the combined exposure scenarios of components in mixtures are firstly needed to conduct the mixture risk assessment, systematic combined exposure scenarios are still lacking. In this study, combined inhalation exposure scenarios of biocides in household chemical and biocidal products marketed in South Korea were investigated based on the European Union (EU) and Korean chemical product databases and various data sources integration. The information of 1058 biocidal products and 675 household chemical products that are likely to cause inhalation exposure with two or more biocides was collected, and mixture combination patterns were investigated. Binary mixtures occupied 72% in biocidal products. The most frequently appearing binary mixture was phthalthrin and d-phenothrin. Based on the frequency of use, we suggested a priority list of biocide mixture combinations which need to be firstly evaluated for identifying their combined toxicity for the mixture risk assessment. This study highlights that the derived combined inhalation exposure scenarios can support and facilitate further studies on priority settings for mixture risk assessment and management of potentially inhalable biocides.

BioTech ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 10
Author(s):  
Michael F. Eckerstorfer ◽  
Marcin Grabowski ◽  
Matteo Lener ◽  
Margret Engelhard ◽  
Samson Simon ◽  
...  

An intensely debated question is whether or how a mandatory environmental risk assessment (ERA) should be conducted for plants obtained through novel genomic techniques, including genome editing (GE). Some countries have already exempted certain types of GE applications from their regulations addressing genetically modified organisms (GMOs). In the European Union, the European Court of Justice confirmed in 2018 that plants developed by novel genomic techniques for directed mutagenesis are regulated as GMOs. Thus, they have to undergo an ERA prior to deliberate release or being placed on the market. Recently, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) published two opinions on the relevance of the current EU ERA framework for GM plants obtained through novel genomic techniques (NGTs). Regarding GE plants, the opinions confirmed that the existing ERA framework is suitable in general and that the current ERA requirements need to be applied in a case specific manner. Since EFSA did not provide further guidance, this review addresses a couple of issues relevant for the case-specific assessment of GE plants. We discuss the suitability of general denominators of risk/safety and address characteristics of GE plants which require particular assessment approaches. We suggest integrating the following two sets of considerations into the ERA: considerations related to the traits developed by GE and considerations addressing the assessment of method-related unintended effects, e.g., due to off-target modifications. In conclusion, we recommend that further specific guidance for the ERA and monitoring should be developed to facilitate a focused assessment approach for GE plants.


2019 ◽  
Vol 127 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ewa Matyjaszczyk

Abstract In the central part of the European Union soybean, lupin and camelina are minor agricultural crops. The paper presents analysis of plant protection products availability for those crops in Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Germany, Holland, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia. Data from year 2019 show that availability of products is generally insufficient. For camelina in some countries, there are no chemical products available whatsoever. For lupin and soybean, there are not always products available to control some pest groups. However, the products on the market differ significantly among the member states. The results show that in protection of soybean, lupin and camelina, no single active substance is registered for the same crop in all the analysed member states. In very numerous cases, active substance is registered in one out of eight analysed member states only.


Water ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 359 ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Azam ◽  
Seung Maeng ◽  
Hyung Kim ◽  
Ardasher Murtazaev

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document