Comparison of regulations on occupational carcinogens in several industrialized countries

Abstract

Regulations controlling the manufacture and use of carcinogens in the industrial setting of various countries are examined. In addition, the occupational exposure limits (OEL) of chemicals known or suspected to be carcinogenic in humans are listed, and criteria for the establishment of OELs are discussed. It is also stressed that control measures should not be confined to a few developed countries, and it is hoped that attracting attention to their unevenness will contribute to the implementation of a more efficient primary prevention of cancer.

Identification of Carcinogenic Agents and Primary Prevention of Cancer

“…Primary prevention of cancer of occupational and environmental origin, instead, has often stumbled on an obstacle course, and the identification of a chemical or physical agent as carcinogenic has too often met with skepticism, if not open hostility. Some chemical compounds were recognized as carcinogens in some countries and not in others, and even where they have been recognized as carcinogenic, the permitted or accepted concentrations varied considerably from country to country, as if their carcinogenicity could disappear or change at certain borders 2,3 …”

“…Some chemical compounds were recognized as carcinogens in some countries and not in others, and even where they have been recognized as carcinogenic, the permitted or accepted concentrations varied considerably from country to country, as if their carcinogenicity could disappear or change at certain borders. 2,3 The very long delay between the identification of a carcinogenic agent and adoption of adequate measures of prevention cannot be explained by a lack of advanced, specific medical procedures, as was the case in the early fight against some infectious diseases. The measures taken have generally been late and incomplete, coming only after the damage had spread and even then rarely providing total protection.…”

Procedures for Health Risk Assessment in Europe

“…a Selection of irritation as critical effect more likely in Sweden/other Scandinavian countries than in mainland Europe (Holmberg and Lundberg, 1989;Lundberg, 1991 Sources. AIHA, 1996;Arboraad, 1992;Carnevale et al, 1987;DFG, 1992;Fairhurst, 1995;HCN, 1995;Hogberg et al, 2000;Holmberg and Lundberg, 1997;Hunter et al, 1997;MVROM/MSZW, 1990;Ogden and Topping, 1997;SCOEL, 1998;Stijkel et al, 1996;Van Leeuwen et al 1996;Zielhuis et al, 1991. a Information on chemical regulation and uncertainty factors not readily available for Denmark and Norway; therefore, these countries not presented in table.…”

Evolution of cancer etiology and primary prevention.

“…Legislation prohibiting the manufacture of a limited number of chemicals identified as human carcinogens was introduced in the late 1960s in several industrialized countries, but did not cover the same chemical carcinogens in each country. In addition, the criteria to determine which chemicals may be hazardous to humans on the basis of the experimental evidence of carcinogenicity varied considerably from country to country and were, in general, overly exclusive (29,30). Nevertheless, due to the combined effect of banning or reducing exposure to certain carcinogens, the modernization of many industrial production processes, the overall reduction of the number of industrial workers, and the transfer of hazardous industries to developing countries, the number of occupational cancers has decreased in most industrialized countries.…”