Paxman D G, Robinson J C
Center for Occupational and Environmental Health, School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley 94720.
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 1990 Dec;12(3 Pt 1):296-308. doi: 10.1016/s0273-2300(05)80065-0.
We compare the information used by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to regulate carcinogens under its 1989 Air Contaminants Standard to publicly available information on substances with potential carcinogenic activity. Carcinogenicity evaluations were obtained from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH), the National Toxicology Program (NTP), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). We focus on three sets of substances: those which were regulated as carcinogens by OSHA in the Standard, those which were included in the Standard but whose exposure limits are based on noncarcinogenic effects, and those substances designated as potential carcinogens by NIOSH, ACGIH, and/or NTP but which were excluded from the Standard. The data indicate that OSHA relied almost exclusively upon the recommendations of the nongovernmental ACGIH to the exclusion of IARC and the three governmental bodies. Given their statutory authority to evaluate chemical carcinogenicity for regulatory agencies such as OSHA, the exclusion of NIOSH and NTP is particularly striking.
我们将美国职业安全与健康管理局（OSHA）依据其1989年《空气污染物标准》对致癌物进行监管时所使用的信息，与关于具有潜在致癌活性物质的公开可用信息进行了比较。致癌性评估来自美国国家职业安全与健康研究所（NIOSH）、美国政府工业卫生学家会议（ACGIH）、美国国家毒理学计划（NTP）、美国环境保护局（EPA）以及国际癌症研究机构（IARC）。我们重点关注三组物质：那些在该标准中被OSHA列为致癌物的物质；那些被纳入该标准但其接触限值基于非致癌效应的物质；以及那些被NIOSH、ACGIH和/或NTP指定为潜在致癌物但被排除在该标准之外的物质。数据表明，OSHA几乎完全依赖非政府组织ACGIH的建议，而将IARC以及三个政府机构的建议排除在外。鉴于NIOSH和NTP具有为OSHA等监管机构评估化学致癌性的法定权力，它们被排除在外的情况尤为引人注目。
