首页> 外文OA文献 >Scientific issues relevant to setting regulatory criteria to identify endocrine-disrupting substances in the European Union
【2h】

Scientific issues relevant to setting regulatory criteria to identify endocrine-disrupting substances in the European Union

机译:与制定监管标准以识别欧盟破坏内分泌的物质有关的科学问题

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Background: Endocrine disruptors (EDs) are defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) as exogenous compounds or mixtures that alter function(s) of the endocrine system and consequently cause adverse effects in an intact organism, or its progeny, or (sub)populations. European regulations on pesticides, biocides, cosmetics, and industrial chemicals require the European Commission to establish scientific criteria to define EDs.\udObjectives: We address the scientific relevance of four options for the identification of EDs proposed by the European Commission.\udDiscussion: Option 1, which does not define EDs and leads to using interim criteria unrelated to the WHO definition of EDs, is not relevant. Options 2 and 3 rely on the WHO definition of EDs, which is widely accepted by the scientific community, with option 3 introducing additional categories based on the strength of evidence (suspected EDs and endocrine-active substances). Option 4 adds potency to the WHO definition, as a decision criterion. We argue that potency is dependent on the adverse effect considered and is scientifically ambiguous, and note that potency is not used as a criterion to define other particularly hazardous substances such as carcinogens and reproductive toxicants. The use of potency requires a context that goes beyond hazard identification and corresponds to risk characterization, in which potency (or, more relevantly, the dose–response function) is combined with exposure levels.\udConclusions: There is scientific agreement regarding the adequacy of the WHO definition of EDs. The potency concept is not relevant to the identification of particularly serious hazards such as EDs. As is common practice for carcinogens, mutagens, and reproductive toxicants, a multi-level classification of ED based on the WHO definition, and not considering potency, would be relevant (corresponding to option 3 proposed by the European Commission).
机译:背景:内分泌干扰物(ED)被世界卫生组织(WHO)定义为会改变内分泌系统功能并因此对完整生物体或其子代或子体造成不利影响的外源性化合物或混合物。人口。欧洲关于杀虫剂,杀生物剂,化妆品和工业化学品的法规要求欧洲委员会建立科学标准来定义ED。\ ud目标:我们解决了欧盟委员会提出的用于鉴定ED的四种选择的科学意义。\ ud讨论:选项第1条没有定义ED,并导致使用与WHO的ED定义无关的临时标准,因此没有意义。选项2和3依赖于WHO对ED的定义,该定义已为科学界所接受,选项3根据证据的强度(可疑ED和内分泌活性物质)引入了其他类别。备选方案4作为决策标准,增加了WHO定义的效力。我们认为效价取决于所考虑的不利影响,并且在科学上是模棱两可的,并且请注意,效价未用作定义其他特别危险的物质(例如致癌物和生殖毒性物质)的标准。效力的使用需要超出危害识别范围并与风险特征相对应的背景,在这种情况下,效力(或更重要的是剂量反应功能)与暴露水平相结合。\ ud结论:关于是否有足够的科学共识WHO对ED的定义。效力概念与识别特别严重的危害(如EDs)无关。按照致癌物,诱变剂和生殖毒物的惯例,基于WHO定义而不考虑药效的ED的多级分类将是有意义的(对应于欧洲委员会提议的选择3)。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号