Risk Management Case History – Detergents

Calvin, G.

doi:10.1016/b978-1-85573-812-6.50017-1

Cited by 8 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Interestingly, open application tests with nickel, even on irritant‐treated skin, demonstrated that the elicitation threshold was more than 3 orders of magnitude higher than for 2‐D occluded patch testing on surfactant‐damaged skin (29). Finally, use tests conducted among sensitized individuals using products which contain the substance to which they are allergic (28, 30–33) demonstrate that there are identifiable conditions under which allergic contact dermatitis is not elicited, that is, a no‐effect product use level can be identified.…”

Section: Thresholds In Sensitizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Labelling of skin sensitizers: the new European Dangerous Preparations Directive

Roggeband

Basketter

Groot³

et al. 2001

Contact Dermatitis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The new Dangerous Preparations Directive (DPD, 1999/45/EC) introduces a special labelling requirement for skin sensitizers in products that are regulated under this Directive. The packaging of products containing 0.1% of a sensitizer must bear the inscription "Contains 'name of sensitizer'. May produce an allergic reaction." The aim is to protect individuals already sensitized by providing information which enables them to avoid products containing ingredients which may elicit their allergy. However, this is only of benefit where such sensitized individuals do exist in the population. Moreover, this labelling requirement does not take into account the potency of the skin sensitizer. For each sensitizer and type of skin exposure, there will be levels below which it will not elicit allergic contact dermatitis reactions in individuals who are sensitized to that chemical. We therefore propose that within the new DPD, it should be possible to override this labelling requirement with well-documented data, to ensure that information provided to the consumer on the product label is not misleading. The current implementation in the DPD of what is in principle a good idea means that further action (legislative changes; scope for derogation) is needed if the potential benefits are not to be lost.

show abstract

Section: Thresholds In Sensitizationmentioning

confidence: 99%