Towards a more effective reach legislation in protecting human health more effective reach in protecting human health

There is growing evidence indicating the substantial contribution of man-made products to an increase in the risk of diseases of civilization. In this article, the Belgian Scientific Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and restriction of CHemicals (REACH) Committee gives a critical view on the working of REACH. The current regulatory framework needs to further evolve taking into account data generated using modern science and technology. There is a need for improved assessment process not only before but also after entering the market. Objectivity, transparency, and the follow-up after market access can be optimized. Additionally, no guidance documents exist for regulation of mixture effects. Further, the lengthiness before regulatory action is a big concern. Decision making often takes several years leading to uncertainties for both producers and end users. A first proposed improvement is the implementation of independent toxicity testing, to assure objectivity, transparency, and check and improve compliance. A "no data, no market" principle could prevent access of hazardous chemicals to the market. Additionally, the introduction of novel testing could improve information on endpoints such as endocrine disrupting abilities, neurotoxicity, and immunotoxicity. An adapted regulatory framework that integrates data from different sources and comparing the outputs with estimates of exposure is required. Fast toxicology battery testing and toxicokinetic testing could improve speed of decision making. Hereby, several improvements have been proposed that could improve the current REACH legislation.

Towards 'one substance - one assessment': An analysis of EU chemical registration and aquatic risk assessment frameworks

With the Green Deal the EU aims to achieve a circular economy, restore biodiversity and reduce environmental pollution. As a part of the Green Deal a 'one-substance one-assessment' (OS-OA) approach for chemicals has been proposed. The registration and risk assessment of chemicals on the European market is currently fragmented across different legal frameworks, dependent on the chemical's use. In this review, we analysed the five main European chemical registration frameworks and their risk assessment procedures for the freshwater environment, covering 1) medicines for human use, 2) veterinary medicines, 3) pesticides, 4) biocides and 5) industrial chemicals. Overall, the function of the current frameworks is similar, but important differences exist between the frameworks' environmental protection goals and risk assessment strategies. These differences result in inconsistent assessment outcomes for similar chemicals. Chemicals are also registered under multiple frameworks due to their multiple uses, and chemicals which are not approved under one framework are in some instances allowed on the market under other frameworks. In contrast, an OS-OA will require a uniform hazard assessment between all different frameworks. In addition, we show that across frameworks the industrial chemicals are the least hazardous for the freshwater environment (median PNEC of 2.60E-2 mg/L), whilst biocides are the most toxic following current regulatory assessment schemes (median PNEC of 1.82E-4 mg/L). Finally, in order to facilitate a successful move towards a OS-OA approach we recommend a) harmonisation of environmental protection goals and risk assessment strategies, b) that emission, use and production data should be made publicly available and that data sharing becomes a priority, and c) an alignment of the criteria used to classify problematic substances.

New ideas for non-animal approaches to predict repeated-dose systemic toxicity: Report from an EPAA Blue Sky Workshop

The European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing (EPAA) convened a 'Blue Sky Workshop' on new ideas for non-animal approaches to predict repeated-dose systemic toxicity. The aim of the Workshop was to formulate strategic ideas to improve and increase the applicability, implementation and acceptance of modern non-animal methods to determine systemic toxicity. The Workshop concluded that good progress is being made to assess repeated dose toxicity without animals taking advantage of existing knowledge in toxicology, thresholds of toxicological concern, adverse outcome pathways and read-across workflows. These approaches can be supported by New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) utilising modern molecular technologies and computational methods. Recommendations from the Workshop were based around the needs for better chemical safety assessment: how to strengthen the evidence base for decision making; to develop, standardise and harmonise NAMs for human toxicity; and the improvement in the applicability and acceptance of novel techniques. "Disruptive thinking" is required to reconsider chemical legislation, validation of NAMs and the opportunities to move away from reliance on animal tests. Case study practices and data sharing, ensuring reproducibility of NAMs, were viewed as crucial to the improvement of non-animal test approaches for systemic toxicity.

Towards the review of the European Union Water Framework Directive: Recommendations for more efficient assessment and management of chemical contamination in European surface water resources

Water is a vital resource for natural ecosystems and human life, and assuring a high quality of water and protecting it from chemical contamination is a major societal goal in the European Union. The Water Framework Directive (WFD) and its daughter directives are the major body of legislation for the protection and sustainable use of European freshwater resources. The practical implementation of the WFD with regard to chemical pollution has faced some challenges. In support of the upcoming WFD review in 2019 the research project SOLUTIONS and the European monitoring network NORMAN has analyzed these challenges, evaluated the state-of-the-art of the science and suggested possible solutions. We give 10 recommendations to improve monitoring and to strengthen comprehensive prioritization, to foster consistent assessment and to support solution-oriented management of surface waters. The integration of effect-based tools, the application of passive sampling for bioaccumulative chemicals and an integrated strategy for prioritization of contaminants, accounting for knowledge gaps, are seen as important approaches to advance monitoring. Including all relevant chemical contaminants in more holistic "chemical status" assessment, using effect-based trigger values to address priority mixtures of chemicals, to better consider historical burdens accumulated in sediments and to use models to fill data gaps are recommended for a consistent assessment of contamination. Solution-oriented management should apply a tiered approach in investigative monitoring to identify toxicity drivers, strengthen consistent legislative frameworks and apply solutions-oriented approaches that explore risk reduction scenarios before and along with risk assessment.

Weight of evidence evaluation and systematic review in EU chemical risk assessment: Foundation is laid but guidance is needed

The aim of this review was to investigate if and how the application of weight of evidence (WoE) evaluation or systematic review (SR) in chemical risk assessment is promoted within different regulatory frameworks in the European Union. Legislative and relevant guidance documents within nine regulatory frameworks were scrutinized and compared. WoE evaluation or SR is promoted in seven of the investigated frameworks but sufficient guidance for how to perform these processes is generally lacking. None of the investigated frameworks give enough guidance for generating robust and reproducible WoE evaluations or SRs. In conclusion, the foundation for use of WoE evaluation and SR is laid in the majority of the investigated frameworks, but there is a need to provide more structured and detailed guidance. In order to make the process of developing guidance as efficient as possible, and to ensure smooth transfer of risk assessment's between frameworks if a chemical is risk assessed both as, for example, a biocide and an industrial chemical, it is recommended that guidance is developed jointly by the European regulatory agencies.