Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
When the chemical industry talks about prioritization – a central question in the debate over TSCA reform – more often than not it quickly reduces the question down to the argument that we should focus only on those chemicals, however hazardous or untested they may be, to which we know people are exposed. In a perfect world, that might suffice. But, as this post will explore, the world of exposure assessment is anything but perfect. Read More
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
A new entry showed up sometime in the last day on EPA’s webpage for its ChAMP initiative. It reads: “The Chemical Assessment and Management Program (ChAMP) has been superseded by the comprehensive approach to enhancing the Agency’s current chemicals management program announced by Administrator Lisa Jackson on September 29, 2009.”
Don’t miss this bit at the top of the page:
Yes, that image is a cobweb, which EPA uses to designate archived web content. What’s happening here? Read More
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
In an opinion piece titled “Chemical regulators have overreached” in the August 27, 2009 issue of Nature, two prominent animal welfare advocates claim that vastly larger numbers of chemicals will have to be tested under the European Union’s REACH regulation than previously estimated, and hence that 20 times more laboratory animals will be sacrificed. They call for a moratorium on some animal tests. Well, a closer look reveals that it’s the opiners themselves that have greatly overreached.
[Update 8/28: The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) has just issued this press release also disputing the findings of this new study.]
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
Some time back, I promised a look at whether Canada’s Chemical Management Plan provides a model for TSCA reform. This post will provide that look. Bottom line: While our neighbor to the north has undertaken and accomplished a great deal over the past decade, it has done so with one hand tied behind its back. Read More
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
This new post serves as a response to Charlie Auer’s most recent comment responding to our critique of ChAMP. (To see the whole exchange, start here, then go here, here and here.) So far, this exchange has focused mainly on our disagreement over whether or not EPA is somehow required to do risk assessments under ChAMP. At some point, I hope Charlie and others will engage on the substance of our critique – the serious concerns we’ve raised about the quality and validity of the ChAMP assessments.
Read More
Cal Baier-Anderson, PhD, is a Health Scientist.
In our critique of EPA’s Chemical Assessment and Management Program (ChAMP), we have pointed out that, despite its limitations, there is value in the hazard data that EPA is collecting and analyzing. How so? Read More