Reasons for Reinforcing the Regulation of Chemicals in Europe

2Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

The European Commission's 2020 draft Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability set the ambitious goal of achieving a "Toxic-Free Environment". Those ambitions were harshly criticised by a team based in Germany's Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (or BfR); they claimed that toxicological risks from chemicals had already been minimised and were optimally regulated. This paper outlines evidence to support the Commission's implication that the European Union's chemicals regulatory regime is suboptimal. It also criticises the BfR team's contentions by reference to empirical findings (eg concerning tumours, congenital anomalies and the toxicity of mixtures) and by disentangling their conceptual confusions.

References Powered by Scopus

"Opening up" and "closing down": Power, participation, and pluralism in the social appraisal of technology

1221Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Ten years of research on synergisms and antagonisms in chemical mixtures: A systematic review and quantitative reappraisal of mixture studies

212Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Can food safety policy-making be both scientifically and democratically legitimated? If so, how?

34Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Alternatives to Fish Acute Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) Testing: Predictability of RTgill-W1 Cells and Fathead Minnow Embryos with Actual Wastewater Samples

6Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

One Step Closer to Zero Chemical Pollution: The Legal Adoption and Implications of the Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances Restriction Proposal

3Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Millstone, E., & Clausing, P. (2023). Reasons for Reinforcing the Regulation of Chemicals in Europe. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 14(1), 78–92. https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2022.41

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 2

67%

Lecturer / Post doc 1

33%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Arts and Humanities 1

50%

Engineering 1

50%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free