EDF Health

Selected tag(s): High Production Volume (HPV)

EPA deserves an “A for Effort” for its new Chemical Action Plans

By / Published: January 4, 2010

Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.

Just squeaking in under its self-imposed deadline, late on December 30 EPA issued the first batch of chemical action plans it has promised under its enhanced chemical management program. In doing so, EPA has signaled its intention to do all it can using its existing authority under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) – even as it also makes clear that authority is “both outdated and in need of reform.” To my ear, that strikes just the right balance. Read More »

Posted in Health policy, Regulation / Also tagged American Chemistry Council (ACC), Biomonitoring, Children's safety, Consumer products, Exposure and hazard, PBDEs, Persistent Bioaccumulative and Toxic (PBT), Phthalates, Risk assessment, Significant New Use Rule (SNUR) | Read 1 Response

ChAMP “superseded”: EPA shifts into action mode

By / Published: October 1, 2009

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 It reads: “The Chemical Assessment and Management Program (ChAMP) has been superseded by the comprehensive approach to enhancing the Agency’s current chemicals management program announced by Administrator Lisa Jackson on September 29, 2009.”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 »

Posted in Health policy, Regulation / Also tagged Bisphenol A (BPA), Chemical Assessment and Management Program (ChAMP), Data requirements, Hazard, IUR/CDR, Lead, Mercury, PBDEs, Phthalates, Risk assessment | Comments are closed

Talk about over-reaching: Anti-REACH screed gets nearly everything wrong

By / Published: August 26, 2009

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.]

Posted in Health policy / Also tagged Computational toxicology, Endocrine disruption, EU REACH, In vitro, Risk assessment | Read 5 Responses

EPA announcement on ChAMP

By / Published: June 19, 2009

Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.

It probably goes without saying that EDF welcomes EPA’s decision to suspend the development and posting of risk-based prioritizations under its Chemical Assessment and Mangement Program (ChAMP). EDF has been arguing (see our earlier posts) that ChAMP’s “rush to risk” has taken EPA badly off-track. But we have also identified many useful things that EPA’s existing chemicals program can and should be doing with the data it obtained through the HPV Challenge (whether called ChAMP or not) .

We look forward to working with EPA to craft a new approach, grounded in a return to developing scientifically defensible hazard, not risk, characterizations and transparently identifying and addressing data gaps and data quality problems.

Posted in Health policy, Regulation / Also tagged Chemical Assessment and Management Program (ChAMP), Data requirements, EPA, Prioritization, Risk assessment | Read 1 Response

Using ChAMP to Advance Alternative Testing Technologies

By / Published: June 16, 2009

Cal Baier-Anderson, Ph.D., is a Health Scientist and Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.

Many of the screening-level hazard data being collected and analyzed under ChAMP that pertain to human health are derived from traditional laboratory animal studies. The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) recently offered a “new paradigm for toxicity testing” in its 2008 report Toxicity Testing in the 21^st Century: a Vision and a Strategy. Can ChAMP hazard data be used to facilitate the development of new testing strategies? Read More »

Posted in Health science, Regulation / Also tagged Chemical Assessment and Management Program (ChAMP), EPA, In vitro, In vivo, National Academy of Sciences (NAS) | Comments are closed

ChAMP’s double standard

By / Published: June 1, 2009

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 »

Posted in Health policy, Regulation / Also tagged Chemical Assessment and Management Program (ChAMP), Chemical identity, EPA, Exposure and hazard, IUR/CDR, Risk assessment | Comments are closed

Search
Get new posts by email

Sign up and you'll be notified when we post something new.

Subscribe via RSS
Categories

Categories