Search

Chemicals have improved the functionality and convenience of industrial and consumer products, but sometimes at the expense of human or ecological health. Existing regulatory systems have proven to be inadequate for assessing and managing the tens of thousands of chemicals in commerce. A different approach is urgently needed to minimize ongoing production, use, and exposures to hazardous chemicals. The premise of the essential-use approach is that chemicals of concern should be used only in cases in which their function in specific products is necessary for health, safety, or the functioning of society and when feasible alternatives are unavailable. To optimize the essential-use approach for broader implementation in the United States and Canada, we recommend that governments and businesses (1) identify chemicals of concern for essentiality assessments based on a broad range of hazard traits, going beyond toxicity; (2) expedite decision-making by avoiding unnecessary assessments and strategically asking up to three questions to determine whether the use of the chemical in the product is essential; (3) apply the essential-use approach as early as possible in the process of developing and assessing chemicals; and (4) engage diverse experts in identifying chemical uses and functions, assessing alternatives, and making essentiality determinations and share such information broadly. If optimized and expanded into regulatory systems in the United States and Canada, other policymaking bodies, and businesses, the essential-use approach can improve chemicals management and shift the market toward safer chemistries that benefit human and ecological health., Environmental Science & Technology, 57 (4), ISSN:0013-936X, ISSN:1520-5851

Organohalogen flame retardants are extensively used in both industrial and consumer products but now are being phased out of circulation by both state governments and the United States Federal government. Organophosphate flame retardants have been chosen as the replacement for the halogenated flame retardants. However, relatively little is known about the potential hazard of these class of chemicals to cause adverse health and environmental effects. To address this, we conducted a health and environmental hazard screening of 90 halogenated and 97 organophosphate flame retardants based on the GreenScreen® or Quick Chemical Assessment Tool (QCAT©) methodologies. Priority consideration was given to human health hazards including carcinogenicity (including mutagenicity and genetic toxicity), reproductive or developmental toxicity, endocrine disruption, and acute mammalian toxicity. Environmental hazards given priority consideration included acute aquatic toxicity, persistence, and bioaccumulation. Using publicly available information, each hazard category was assigned a concern level (very-low, low, moderate, high, or very high) based on pre-defined numerical ranges, such as no-observed adverse effect levels and hazard classification schemes from authoritative sources, when available. Where empirical data were not identified, quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) models were relied upon to predict hazard potential. After assigning concern levels for each priority health effect, each chemical received a score, similar to a report card (A, B, C, or F). The majority of the screened chemicals received an F grade due to empirical data suggesting high hazard, QSAR model predictions, and/or excessive data gaps. Acute Mammalian Toxicity was the most prominent potential health hazard identified based on empirical data. The most prevalent data gap was found in both reproductive toxicity and endocrine disruption endpoints due to the lack of identified empirical data or computer models able to predict this hazard. This study highlights the limited toxicity information available for these widely used chemical classes and indicates that more testing and oversight is critically needed to identify safer alternatives for fire prevention.