Safety from toxic substances

Many consumers are concerned about the use of synthetic pesticides, food additives and veter- 

So although there is no doubt that the presence of pesticide residues and food additives is significantly different between organic and conventional foods, there are no generally accepted volumes of data showing that the difference in composition makes a difference to the health of consumers. However, a more precise estimate of the magnitude of risk from pesticide residues or food additives may not make much difference to the view of many consumers, who do not want to take any risk, no matter how small, when not associated with clear benefits for themselves (Torjusen et al. 2004). 

There may be some effect on consumer views if clear health benefits are proven. However, ensuring a defined level of residues in food will be even more difficult than keeping the levels below a certain limit. As described below (see Indirect measurements of effects on health), if pesticide residues are good for health, organic foods will be better still because of their high content of natural pesticides. 

Synthetic toxins unintentionaiiy occurring in food (poiiutants) 

Similar considerations are relevant for other airborne, persistent, bioaccumulating pollutants, primarily polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) and dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT). Naturally occurring toxins - mycotoxins 

---

The latest government regulations set forth under the Toxic Substances Control Act and in PubHc Health Service pubHcations should be checked before formulating new lubricants. Users of lubricants should request Material Safety Data Sheets for each substance involved plus certification of compliance from vendors. Lubricant compounders should insist on similar information from their suppHers for any additive packages. Manufacturers of both additives and lubricants commonly make toxicity checks on commercial products. 

Safety and risk factors evaluate approximately the speed at which a toxic substance reaches a toxic vapour concentration in air. An accurate way to do this would be to know the vapourisation speed for this substance and the air renewal rate of the room in which it is handled. This is why regulations recommend measurement of the vapourisation speed for a particular substance and include it in safety sheets. One can hardly use this figure since it is rarely mentioned. The only substances which were subjected to such measurements are the most commonly used although these figures only are remotely linked to the real conditions. So it was decided to suggest a method derived from the vapour pressure of the substance, which is a factor the vapourisation speed depends on precisely. 

For some substances safety considerations play a large role in deciding operating conditions. For instance, the pressure within equipment containing a toxic substance may be kept below atmospheric pressure to prevent it from coming in contact with employees. On the other hand, some highly explosive materials may be kept a pressure above atmospheric so that air cannot enter the equipment and cause an explosion. 

Data from Hill 1960 Anderson and Hood 1962 Folmar 1977 USEPA 1980 Hudson et al. 1984 Beauchamp et al. 1985 Mayer 1987 Reinert and Rodgers 1987 Ballantyne etal. 1989 Sine 1991 Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry [ATSDR] 1990 and National Institute for Safety and Health [NIOSH] 1990. 

More information about arsine can be obtained from your regional poison control center, your state, county, or local health department the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) your doctor or a clinic in your area that specializes in occupational and environmental health. If the exposure happened at work, you may wish to contact the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) or the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). 

The final element of this federal impact on confidentiality is that certain laws require certain things to be made public. The Toxic Substances Control Act has several useful confidentiality provisions in 14, but it adversely affects confidentiality when it prohibits the EPA withholding of health and safety "studies." That term is not well defined at all. There are conflicting views about which items are "studies." From a careful reexamination of the law, I feel that identity can be confidential and need not be part of a study, if the... 

Knowledge of chemical structure, pharmacokinetics, and metabolic pathways provides a method to assess the safety of flavoring substances that lack a full safety testing profile using data from structurally related substances which have been adequately tested for toxicity. 

For many, familiarity with the TSCA generally stems from its specific reference to polychlorinated biphenyls, which raise a vivid, deadly characterization of the harm caused by them. But the TSCA is not a statute that deals with a single chemical or chemical mixture or product. In fact, under the TSCA, the EPA is authorized to institute testing programs for various chemical substances that may enter the enviromnent. Under the TSCA s broad authorization, data on the production and use of various chemical substances and mixtures may be obtained to protect public health and the environment from the effects of harmful chemicals. In actuality, the TSCA supplements the appropriate sections dealing with toxic substances in other federal stamtes, such as the Clean Water Act (Section 307) and the Occupational Safety and Health Act (Section 6). 

In actual fact a great deal has also been undertaken in this area in the past. Many of the hazardous substances mentioned above have now more or less disappeared from the market. Some were banned (e.g. DDT, CFCs, PCBs), their functions now being performed by less hazardous substances. Other hazardous substances have at least been considerably curtailed in their use with safety requirements being imposed (e.g. chlorinated solvents, highly toxic heavy metals). This has also led to the reduction of risks emanating from hazardous substances in many areas. 

In 1971 when safety and health standards were established by the U. S. Department of Labor for several hundred chemical substances, there were analytical methods available for some of the compounds, but few were validated to ensure the accurate monitoring of the exposure of workers to these toxic substances (1). Consequently, programs were undertaken by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) to develop and validate sampling and analytical methods. The initial intent was to provide methods that would be useful to industry in measuring the exposures of personnel to potentially toxic materials at concentration levels near the accepted standard levels. Consequently, many earlier methods were developed around the standard levels established by the Occupational Safety and Health Act with validation at, for example, levels ranging from one-half to twice the established standard level (2). Often these methods were not validated at lower concentration levels, say, one-tenth of the original level. 

The examples presented in this paper are based on results of our laboratory method development and validation studies. These studies, performed at both SRI International and Arthur D. Little, Inc., were supported by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) from 1974 to 1979. In an effort to provide validated sampling and analytical methods for determining worker exposure to toxic substances, we validated existing methods when possible and developed and validated new procedures when no methods were available. Evaluation and testing of solid sorbents played a major role throughout this work ( 1). 

Residual acrylonitrile has been detected in a limited number of samples of commercial polymeric materials derived from acrylonitrile (United States Consumer Product Safety Commission, 1978) however, current processes for fibre and polymer production are believed to have reduced residual levels significantly (Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 1990). 

Safe water Water that does not contain harmful bacteria, toxic materials, chemicals, or substances, and is considered safe for drinking even if it may have taste, odor, color, and certain mineral problems Safety Practical certainty and very high probability that injury will not occur from the exposure to a hazard the reverse function of the sum total of toxicity and bioavailability. Safety may be expressed as safety = 1 (toxicity x bioavailability)... 

---