Occupational and environmental standard setting for metals: More questions than answers†

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Several questions of interest in setting quality standards to prevent increased cancer risks, both in workers and in the general population, are discussed. Conclusive answers often are not available. The following questions are discussed inter alia, particularly in respect of arsenic, chromium and nickel: (1) If metals as such do not carry a cancer risk, but particularly some compounds, which compounds are considered human carcinogens? (2) Is it possible, at least for some compounds, to assume an operational threshold dose? (3) Is linear extrapolation according to the one‐hit model always appropriate? (4) What role is played by interaction with other chemicals? (5) In what way should monitoring and risk assessment be based upon specified (groups of) metal compounds? (6) Should separate standards be made for different processes and different (groups of) compounds? (7) How do we promote application of metal speciation techniques?

This publication has 23 references indexed in Scilit: