Poisons Board

The Poisons Act 1952 (revised 1989) regulates the importation, possession, manufacture, compounding, storage, transport, sale and use of poisons. Essentially, the act determines whether a pharmaceutical product is a prescription item, a pharmacy-only item or an over-the-counter (OTC) item. The classification of a pharmaceutical product into the various categories is the function of the Poisons Board whose secretariat is placed at the offices of the Director of Pharmaceutical Services. The Director of Pharmaceutical Services is also the competent authority for the issuance of import and export authorisation of psychotropics under the Convention on Psychotropic Substances 1971. 

The advent of the Pharmacy and Poisons Act 1933 led to further control of supply of poisons. This Act led to the formation of a Poisons Board, responsible for rule making, local authority lists, inspection and enforcement. This legislation was in force until 1968, when the Medicines Act replaced the medicines component of the Pharmacy and Poisons Act, and 1972, when a new Poisons Act replaced the poisons function of the Pharmacy and Poisons Act 1933. 

The Poisons Board advises the Home Secretary on matters relating to non-medicinal poisons. The Poisons Board consists of at least 16 members, five of whom are appointed by the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain and one of whom must be a pharmaceutical manufacturer or wholesaler. The chairman of the board is appointed by the Secretary of State. The purpose of the board is to advise the Secretary of State as to which substances should be included in the Poisons List. 

In February 2014, Kenya had 39 pharmaceutical manufacturers registered with the Pharmacy and Poisons Board (PPB). Thirty-four were producing pharmaceuticals for human health, while the rest concentrated on veterinary products (Wamae and Kariuki Kungu, 2014). There were also 20 multinational firms with local representation for marketing purposes and /or involved in clinical trials. 

Aristech Chemical Corporation, See Sunoco Chemicals Unit of Smioco hic. (US), 217 Arizona Chemical, 217 Arizona Department of Agriculture, 290 Arizona Department of Eiivkonmental Quality, 290 Arizona Industrial Commission, 290 Arizona Poison and Drug hiforniation Center, 311 Arkansas Department of Eiivironmental Quality, 290 Arkansas Poison and Drug Infomiation Center, 311 Arkansas State Plant Board, 290 Aniienian National Academy of Sciences, 255 Armour Polymers Ltd., 168 Arris Intemational Corporation, 218 Arsenic acid, 19... 

Dr. Karch is forensic science editor for Humana Press, and he serves on the editorial boards of the Journal of Cardiovascular Toxicology, the Journal of Clinical Forensic Medicine (London), Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology, and Clarke s Analysis of Drugs and Poisons. 

Eisler, R. 1971. Cadmium poisoning in Fundulus heteroclitus (Pisces Cyprinodontidae) and other marine organisms. Jour. Fish. Res. Board Canada 28 1225-1234. 

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has found much evidence to indicate the probable cause of the January 6, 2005, collision and derailment of Norfolk Southern train 192 in Graniteville, South Carolina, was the failure of the crew of Norfolk Southern train P22 to return the main line switch to the normal position after the crew completed work at an industry track. Contributing to the severity of the accident was the puncture of the ninth car in the train, a tank car containing chlorine, which resulted in the release of poison gas. 

With Dunlap casting the deciding vote, the Board ruled in November that, under the law, other dyes could not and should not be forbidden unless the Bureau of Chemistry (i.e. Hesse) could present evidence that the dyes in question were harmful to human health. Considering the number of dyes on the market, this was tantamount to rejecting mandatory certification. Still, the decision reached was inescapable to one concerned, as McCabe was, with the text of the law as enacted. The statute only expressly prohibited poisonous color in confectionary, and under the general adulteration clause, prohibited any added ingredient which would render a food harmful to health. This was as far as McCabe would go. The question of moral propriety was simply not relevant. It was the duty of the executive branch to enforce the law ns enacted, and not to legislate (59) ... 

Prakash, A. Medcof, J. C. Tennant, A. D. "Paralytic Shellfish Poisoning in Eastern Canada" Bull. 177 Fisheries Research Board of Canada Ottawa, Ontario, 1971 p. 87. 

Internet, US Chem. Safety Haz. Investigation Board, CSB 1999-4319 A delivery of the above was charged to a hydrochloric acid tank, poisonous yellow-green fumes were evolved. 

U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, Investigation Report—Hydrogen Sulfide Poisoning. U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board Report No. 2002-01-I-AL, Jan. 2003. 

Tatarelli, G. 1946. Cumulative chlorine poisoning on board a submarine. Ann. Naval. Colonial Med. 51(3) 337—348. (Translated from Italian by Leo Kanner Associates for Information Services Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Redwood City, CA. March... 

Othman Mohamed Mustafa. Acute Poisoning with Hair dye Containing Paraphenyiene Diamine-The Gazira Experience. Journal of the Arab Board of Specialization 2001 3 (2)... 

Diaa E. El Gaili, Osman M. Mustafa. Psychiatric Manifestations in Hair Dye poisoning. Journal of the Arab Board of Medical Specializations 2001 3 2... 

Methanol and ethanol have been considered as promising fuels for generating H2, especially for on-board fuel cell applications due to their easy availability, ability to transport, and reaction simplicity.52 121 159 169 For example, both alcohols have high H2-to-carbon ratio (H/C) of 4 and 3, respectively (Table 2.1). They could be synthesized from renewable sources such as biomass and thus the ability to close the carbon cycle.161 166 Unlike hydrocarbon fuels, methanol and ethanol are free from sulfur, and this avoids additional sulfur removal step in the fuel processing. In addition, methanol can be reformed at a lower temperature, around 300 °C, and this makes the fuel processing relatively simple and less complicated. Furthermore, unlike natural gas, which produces primarily syngas, reforming of methanol and ethanol can in principle produce a mixture of H2 and C02, and this would also simplify the downstream CO cleanup for fuel cells such as PEMFCs where CO is a poison. 

---