Hexavalent chromium [Cr(VI)] is recognized as a human carcinogen via inhalation, based on elevated rates of lung cancer among occupationally exposed workers in certain industries. Cr(VI) is also genotoxic in bacterial and mammalian cell lines. In contrast, scientific panels in the United States and abroad have reviewed the weight of evidence (WOE) and decided that the available data are insufficient to conclude that Cr(VI) is an oral carcinogen. A criterion of 0.2 ppb was established by a California agency for Cr(VI) in drinking water to prevent cancer, however, this criterion was withdrawn in November, 2001. This criterion was remarkably lower than the promulgated California and federal drinking-water standards for total chromium of 50 ppb and 100 ppb, respectively. Both of the promulgated standards are designed to be protective of humans who ingest Cr(VI). This article describes a WOE analysis to examine the likelihood that Cr(VI) in drinking water poses a cancer hazard at the current U.S. drinking-water standard. The results indicate that: (1) From the historical epidemiological studies, there are a few reports of increased rates of digestive system cancer among Cr(VI)-exposed workers, although most are not statistically significant; (2) the preponderance of evidence from recent epidemiological studies of Cr(VI)-exposed workers does not support an increased risk of cancer outside of the respiratory system; (3) studies of four environmentally exposed populations are negative; (4) there is only one lifetime animal feeding study, and the findings from that study are considered to be flawed and inconclusive; and (5) recent kinetics and in vivo genotoxicity data demonstrate that Cr(VI) is reduced to nontoxic Cr(III) in saliva, in the acidic conditions of the stomach, and in blood. In short, at concentrations at least as high as the current U.S. maximum contaminant level (100 ppb), and probably at least an order of magnitude higher, Cr(VI) is reduced to Cr(III) prior to or upon systemic absorption. The weight of scientific evidence supports that Cr(VI) is not carcinogenic in humans via the oral route of exposure at permissible drinking-water concentrations.

Analyses were conducted on four pharmaceutical compounds, representing different therapeutic classes, to evaluate the presence and potential adverse human health effects of trace levels of these substances in aqueous environmental media. Acetylsalicylic acid, clofibrate, cyclophosphamide, and indomethacin have been detected in aqueous environmental media including sewage treatment plant effluent, surface water, drinking water, and groundwater. An extensive literature search and chemical-specific risk assessments were performed to assess the potential human health significance of each compound's individual presence in environmental media. Safe water quality limits were estimated for each pharmaceutical by following the USEPA Methodology for Deriving Ambient Water Quality Criteria for the Protection of Human Health and were compared to the concentrations found in the environment. The calculation of the provisional ambient water quality criteria involved estimation of human exposure to contaminated water, including intake via bioaccumulation in fish, and calculation of cancer risk and non-cancer hazard indices. Parameters detailing the toxicological and pharmacological nature, exposure assessment, and environmental fate and transport of each pharmaceutical were also considered. The overall conclusion was that based on available data, no appreciable risk to humans exists, as the detected concentrations of each of these pharmaceutical compounds found in aqueous media were far below the derived safe limits.

The 2008 National Research Council report "Phthalates and Cumulative Risk Assessment: Tasks Ahead," rejected the underlying premises of TEQ-like approaches - e.g., chemicals are true congeners; are metabolized and detoxified similarly; produce the same biological effects by the same mode of action; exhibit parallel dose response curves - instead asserting that cumulative risk assessment should apply dose addition (DA) to all chemicals that produce "common adverse outcomes" (CAOS). Published mixtures data and a human health risk assessment for phthalates and anti-androgens were evaluated to determine how firmly the DA-CAOS concept is supported and with what level of statistical certainty the results may be extrapolated to lower doses in humans. Underlying assumptions of the DA-CAOS concept were tested for accuracy and consistency against data for two human pharmaceuticals and its logical predictions were compared to human clinical and epidemiological experience. Those analyses revealed that DA-CAOS is scientifically untenable. Therefore, an alternative approach was developed - the Human-Relevant Potency-Threshold (HRPT) - that appears to fit the data better and avoids the contradictions inherent in the DA-CAOS concept. The proposed approach recommends application of independent action for phthalates and other chemicals with potential anti-androgenic properties at current human exposure levels.

Analyses were conducted on four pharmaceutical compounds, representing different therapeutic classes, to evaluate the presence and potential adverse human health effects of trace levels of these substances in aqueous environmental media. Acetylsalicylic acid, clofibrate, cyclophosphamide, and indomethacin have been detected in aqueous environmental media including sewage treatment plant effluent, surface water, drinking water, and groundwater. An extensive literature search and chemical-specific risk assessments were performed to assess the potential human health significance of each compound's individual presence in environmental media. Safe water quality limits were estimated for each pharmaceutical by following the USEPA Methodology for Deriving Ambient Water Quality Criteria for the Protection of Human Health and were compared to the concentrations found in the environment. The calculation of the provisional ambient water quality criteria involved estimation of human exposure to contaminated water, including intake via bioaccumulation in fish, and calculation of cancer risk and non-cancer hazard indices. Parameters detailing the toxicological and pharmacological nature, exposure assessment, and environmental fate and transport of each pharmaceutical were also considered. The overall conclusion was that based on available data, no appreciable risk to humans exists, as the detected concentrations of each of these pharmaceutical compounds found in aqueous media were far below the derived safe limits.

Management of hazards in biomedical research facilities requires the application of the traditional industrial hygiene responsibilities of anticipation, recognition, evaluation, and control to characterize the work environment, evaluate tasks and equipment, identify hazards, define exposure groups, and recommend controls. Generally, the diversity and unique characteristics of hazards faced by laboratory and animal facility employees and the short-term and low-level nature of the exposures factor into the selection of proper exposure control measures in the laboratory. The proper selection of control measures is based on a hierarchy of elimination and minimization by engineering controls, followed last by personal protective equipment when exposures cannot be eliminated. Once it is decided that personal protective equipment is needed, specific regulations and guidelines define safety standards for research facilities, including the elements of a sound respiratory protection program. These elements include respirator selection (including appropriate protection factors), medical evaluation, fit testing, training, inspection, maintenance and care, quality, quantity and flow of breathing air, and routine and emergency use procedures.