Assessment conclusions

Chloro-ort/20-toluidine is listed as a Class 3 carcinogenic substance in Germany these are substances which cause concern that they could be carcinogenic for man but which cannot be assessed conclusively because of lack of data (Deutsche Forschungs-gemeinschaft, 1999). 

Risk descriptors (according to risk assessment conclusions) VII Regulatory options (guidance)... 

Significant uncertainty exists in the current risk assessment of bisphenol A, which has led to the EU regulatory risk assessment conclusion that further risk data need to be collected, especially because it is a potential endocrine disruptor. Under the systems framework, recommendations would apply during the time necessary to collect further information on bisphenol A, thereby providing a... 

As noted in Box 6.3, although bisphenol A is a potential endocrine disruptor, exposure levels are not anticipated to exceed any DNEL when used as a substance or preparation when correct safety measures are used. Further information is needed to confirm this risk assessment conclusion and examine the likelihood that exposure exceeds DNEL when safety measures are not applied. 

Assessment (conclusions reached by the pharmacists Prescription, nonprescription, and alternative... 

The controversies in the classification of DA receptors have been reviewed. 2 The majority of current receptor binding data supports two major DA receptor classes for the CNS, D-1 and D-2, with the DA autoreceptor probably belonging to the latter. 2 However, the data is not sufficiently quantitative to assess conclusively whether more than one distinct DA autoreceptor is present on DA neurons. 2 Furthermore, in vivo studies with behavioral models of postsynaptic and neurochemical models of presynaptic dopaminergic activity have demonstrated that DA autoreceptors and postsynaptic DA receptors are diffierent.38,43,44 The suggestion that the so-called D-3 binding site corresponds to presynaptic DA autoreceptors has been refuted both on the basis of pharmacological and neurochemical evidence. 

Furthermore, the human health section of the EU Risk Assessment has concluded that the fire retardant additive TBPBA carries no risks, and the EU Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks (SCHER) has confirmed the EU (Risk Assessment) conclusions that TBPBA presents no human health risk. TBPBA is a brominated flame retardant (used in electrical equipment including computers, televisions, and in printed wiring boards (PWB), and so on [21],... 

It is difficult to assess conclusively the accuracy of these early reports. Even if each incident could have been observed, a physical impossibility, one could never check the veracity of, say, an interview. In many cases, one knows that the interview must be, partly at least, journalistic fabrication because it is too stereotypical to be true, but this is far from objective proof Nevertheless, on the basis of those incidents that were observed, interviews with people who were present at others (local reporters, photographers, deckchair attendants, etc.) and a careful check on internal consistency, some estimate of the main distortions can be made. Checks with the local press are particularly revealing. Not only are the reports more detailed and specific, but they avoid statements like all the dance halls near the seafront were smashed when every local resident knows that there is only one dance hall near the front. 

The suggested risk levels from M1L-STD-882D are as follows high risk = 1-5, serious risk = 6-9, medium risk = 10-17, and low risk = 18-20. Based on this information, the risk assessment conclusions that can be derived from this example are ... 

---