Division of Health Policy and Management at School of Public Health at University of Minnesota, USA.
J Law Med Ethics. 2009 Winter;37(4):633-50. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-720X.2009.00437.x.
The OSHA system for oversight of chemicals in the workplace was evaluated to derive lessons for oversight of nanotechnology. Criteria relating to the development, attributes, evolution, and outcomes of the system were used for evaluation that was based upon quantitative expert elicitation and historical literature analysis. The oversight system had inadequate resources in terms of finances, expertise, and personnel, and insufficient incentive for compliance. The system showed a lack of flexibility in novel situations. There were minimal requirements on companies for data on health and safety of their products. These factors have a strong influence on public confidence and health and safety. The oversight system also scored low on attributes such as public input, transparency, empirical basis, conflict of interest, and informed consent. The experts in our sample tend to believe that the current oversight system for chemicals in the workplace is neither adequate nor effective. It is very likely that the performance of the OSHA oversight system for nanomaterials will be equally inadequate.
OSHA 对工作场所化学物质的监督系统进行了评估，以便为纳米技术的监督吸取经验教训。评估所使用的标准涉及系统的开发、属性、演变和结果，评估的基础是定量专家 elicitation 和历史文献分析。监督系统在财务、专业知识和人员方面资源不足，对合规性的激励也不够。该系统在新情况下缺乏灵活性。公司对其产品的健康和安全数据几乎没有要求。这些因素对公众信心和健康与安全有很大影响。监督系统在公众投入、透明度、经验依据、利益冲突和知情同意等属性方面的得分也较低。我们的样本中的专家倾向于认为，目前工作场所化学物质的监督系统既不充分也无效。OSHA 对纳米材料的监督系统的性能很可能同样不足。
