1 / 18

Human & Environmental Risk Assessment

Human & Environmental Risk Assessment Human Health Risk Assessment under HERA: Challenges and Solutions Christeine Lally Co-Chair of the HERA Human Health Task Force. Human Health Task Force. C. Poelloth, C. Arregui, J. Backmann – AISE Secretariat. G. Holland (Unilever) * C. Lally (P&G) *

Download Presentation

Human & Environmental Risk Assessment

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.


Presentation Transcript

  1. Human & Environmental Risk Assessment • Human Health Risk Assessment under HERA: Challenges and Solutions • Christeine Lally • Co-Chair of the HERA Human Health Task Force

  2. Human Health Task Force C. Poelloth, C. Arregui, J. Backmann – AISE Secretariat • G. Holland (Unilever) * • C. Lally (P&G) * • F. Bartnik (Henkel) • J. Boyd (Colgate) • G. Helmlinger (P&G) • S. Kirkwood (McBride) • ( * = co-chairs ) • W. Aulmann (Cognis) • O. Grundler (BASF) • S. Jacobi (Degussa) • R. Kreiling (Clariant) • M. Maier (ZEODET) • P. Martin (Rhodia) • H. Messinger (Cognis) • J.R. Plautz (Ciba) • G. Veenstra (Shell)

  3. Human Health Task Force • The GOAL • propose a Methodology for a Human Health Risk Assessment (hazard + exposure) • test the Methodology with 3 initial chemicals – alkyl sulphates, a zeolite, an optical brightener (Phase IA) • seek peer consultation from scientific stakeholders • refine Methodology -“Framework Document” • deploy Methodology to Phase IB (15-20) and refine further (lessons learned!)

  4. Human Health Task Force • The Process • focus on a tiered approach to both hazard and exposure assessment • focus on chemicals used primarily in AISE products – hazard profiles and potential exposure for humans • focus on consumer use of these products (i.e. not professional use or workplace exposure) • focus on intended use but also consider other foreseeable uses and accidental use • focus on endpoints of concern for the consumer from the exposures expected from AISE products

  5. Human Health Conclusions • Specific for European Usage HERA Human Health Risk Assessment based on EU Technical Guidance Document for New and Existing substances

  6. The HERA methodology follows a tiered approach: • Consider possible uses of chemicals in household detergent and cleaning products • Consider consumer activity during cleaning tasks - review also foreseeable other uses of products • Consider hazards which are relevant for known product uses and exposures (e.g. is dermal contact likely? could ingestion occur inadvertently?) • Consider also serious adverse effects (e.g. cancer, reproductive toxicity) and review relevance for consumer exposure through product use • Determine whether the consumer is at risk? (is the Margin of Exposure adequate for consumer safety?)

  7. What do consumers do with products ? ?

  8. USE & EXPOSURE • Identify • which product category (laundry compact, fabric conditioner, toilet cleaner….) • product concentration (% in product, range) • type of application (powder, tablet, spray, wipe….) and how is product used

  9. Formulator companies asked to provide (in confidence): • Use levels of Phase 1A and 1B ingredients in their products • List of product categories where ingredients are currently used • Published or in-house data on consumer habits and practices for product categories (at least provide ‘recommended use’)

  10. USE & EXPOSURE • HERA provides simple multiplicative mathematical models – based on exposure equations in EU TGD and in ECETOC Technical Reports • HERA uses real data (formulators) or, if unavailable, it uses ‘reasonable’ defaults • HERA uses a conservative ‘worst case’ scenario in first step (tiered approach) • HERA checks exposure estimate for ‘realism’ • HERA considers need for more refined exposure estimate

  11. Consumer Exposure

  12. + • HAZARD • Producer companies asked to: • collect available toxicology data on ingredient – IUCLID, SIDS, IPCS, in-house company data etc. • validate data based on current standards - but do not discard older data; consider human experience • consider toxicological endpoints most relevant for use - endpoints of interest largely driven by predicted exposure; identify no-effect-levels and possible data gaps And Formulator companies asked to provide: • product safety data where available and useful

  13. Consumer “Hazard”

  14. Is the consumer at risk…? • compare relevant hazard(s) with foreseeable exposure(s) for consumer • ratio of “no effect level” and “exposure”  MOS or “margin of safety” [NOAEL/Exposure = MOS]. • consider whether MOS is adequate to protect the consumer – follow guidance in Technical Reports from ECETOC and in EU TGD • how good is the answer ? (Uncertainty….)

  15. Is the consumer at risk…? • If MOS is unacceptable…….. • review exposure estimates • review hazard dataset • consider product safety data • use human experience data • get more data…. (exposure, hazard…) • Expert judgement • Transparency in arguments & decisions !

  16. Thank You ! • Gracias !

More Related