Suchergebnisse

From MDPI via Jisc Publications Router ; History: accepted 2022-02-16, pub-electronic 2022-02-19 ; Publication status: Published ; Funder: European Union; Grant(s): 733032 ; Safety assessment of UV filters for human health by the Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS) is based on the estimation of internal dose following external (skin) application of cosmetic products, and comparison with a toxicological reference value after conversion to internal dose. Data from human biomonitoring (HBM) could be very useful in this regard, because it is based on the measurement of real-life internal exposure of the human population to a chemical. UV filters were included in the priority list of compounds to be addressed under the European Human Biomonitoring Initiative (HBM4EU), and risk assessment of benzophenone-3 (BP-3) was carried out based on HBM data. Using BP-3 as an example, this study investigated the benefits and limitations of the use of external versus internal exposure data to explore the usefulness of HBM to support the risk assessment of cosmetic ingredients. The results show that both approaches did indicate a risk to human health under certain levels of exposure. They also highlight the need for more robust exposure data on BP-3 and other cosmetic ingredients, and a standardized framework for incorporating HBM data in the risk assessment of cosmetic products.

International audience ; The European Human Biomonitoring Initiative (HBM4EU1) has established a European Union-wide human biomonitoring (HBM) programme to generate knowledge on human internal exposure to chemical pollutants and their potential health impacts in Europe, in order to support policy makers' efforts to ensure chemical safety and improve health in Europe. A prioritisation strategy was necessary to determine and meet the most important needs of both policy makers and risk assessors, as well as common national needs of participating countries and a broad range of stakeholders. This strategy consisted of three mains steps: 1) mapping of knowledge gaps identified by policy makers, 2) prioritisation of substances using a scoring system, and 3) generation of a list of priority substances reflective of the scoring, as well as of public policy priorities and available resources. For the first step, relevant ministries and agencies at EU and national levels, as well as members of the Stakeholder Forum each nominated up to 5 substances/substance groups of concern for policy-makers. These nominations were collated into a preliminary list of 48 substances/substance groups, which was subsequently shortened to a list of 23 after considering the total number of nominations each substance/substance group received and the nature of the nominating entities. For the second step, a panel of 11 experts in epidemiology, toxicology, exposure sciences, and occupational and environmental health scored each of the substances/substance groups using prioritisation criteria including hazardous properties, exposure characteristics, and societal concern. The scores were used to rank the 23 substances/substance groups. In addition, substances were categorised according to the level of current knowledge about their hazards, extent of human exposure (through the availability of HBM data), regulatory status and availability of analytical methods for biomarker measurement. Finally, in addition to the ranking and categorisation of the ...

International audience ; The European Human Biomonitoring Initiative (HBM4EU1) has established a European Union-wide human biomonitoring (HBM) programme to generate knowledge on human internal exposure to chemical pollutants and their potential health impacts in Europe, in order to support policy makers' efforts to ensure chemical safety and improve health in Europe. A prioritisation strategy was necessary to determine and meet the most important needs of both policy makers and risk assessors, as well as common national needs of participating countries and a broad range of stakeholders. This strategy consisted of three mains steps: 1) mapping of knowledge gaps identified by policy makers, 2) prioritisation of substances using a scoring system, and 3) generation of a list of priority substances reflective of the scoring, as well as of public policy priorities and available resources. For the first step, relevant ministries and agencies at EU and national levels, as well as members of the Stakeholder Forum each nominated up to 5 substances/substance groups of concern for policy-makers. These nominations were collated into a preliminary list of 48 substances/substance groups, which was subsequently shortened to a list of 23 after considering the total number of nominations each substance/substance group received and the nature of the nominating entities. For the second step, a panel of 11 experts in epidemiology, toxicology, exposure sciences, and occupational and environmental health scored each of the substances/substance groups using prioritisation criteria including hazardous properties, exposure characteristics, and societal concern. The scores were used to rank the 23 substances/substance groups. In addition, substances were categorised according to the level of current knowledge about their hazards, extent of human exposure (through the availability of HBM data), regulatory status and availability of analytical methods for biomarker measurement. Finally, in addition to the ranking and categorisation of the ...

International audience ; The European Human Biomonitoring Initiative (HBM4EU1) has established a European Union-wide human biomonitoring (HBM) programme to generate knowledge on human internal exposure to chemical pollutants and their potential health impacts in Europe, in order to support policy makers' efforts to ensure chemical safety and improve health in Europe. A prioritisation strategy was necessary to determine and meet the most important needs of both policy makers and risk assessors, as well as common national needs of participating countries and a broad range of stakeholders. This strategy consisted of three mains steps: 1) mapping of knowledge gaps identified by policy makers, 2) prioritisation of substances using a scoring system, and 3) generation of a list of priority substances reflective of the scoring, as well as of public policy priorities and available resources. For the first step, relevant ministries and agencies at EU and national levels, as well as members of the Stakeholder Forum each nominated up to 5 substances/substance groups of concern for policy-makers. These nominations were collated into a preliminary list of 48 substances/substance groups, which was subsequently shortened to a list of 23 after considering the total number of nominations each substance/substance group received and the nature of the nominating entities. For the second step, a panel of 11 experts in epidemiology, toxicology, exposure sciences, and occupational and environmental health scored each of the substances/substance groups using prioritisation criteria including hazardous properties, exposure characteristics, and societal concern. The scores were used to rank the 23 substances/substance groups. In addition, substances were categorised according to the level of current knowledge about their hazards, extent of human exposure (through the availability of HBM data), regulatory status and availability of analytical methods for biomarker measurement. Finally, in addition to the ranking and categorisation of the substances, the resources available for the project and the alignment with the policy priorities at European level were considered to produce a final priority list of 9 substances/substance groups for research activities and surveys within the framework of the HBM4EU project.