Bee guidance documents: An end users view. Mark Miles Research & Development Environmental Safety Ecotoxicology Bees
|
|
- Barrie Tate
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Bee guidance documents: An end users view Mark Miles Research & Development Environmental Safety Ecotoxicology Bees
2 Agenda 1. Guidance documents: expectations, uses and users (3 slides) 2. What does the new guidance bring? (5 slides) 3. So what is the potential impact of the new guidance? (9 slides) 4. What does the new guidance mean to me? (2 slides) 5. Recommendations (1 slide)
3 Who uses guidance documents? Regulated industry Meet requirements of pesticide legislation Decide on product development Screen for new ( safer ) substances Plan testing and research programmes for substances and products Prepare dossiers and risk assessment for submission Product submission Guidance document on bees Regulatory authorities and Commission Check substances conform to uniform principles Ensure data requirements are met Perform a peer review of the submitters dossier Risk assessment Approval of products and placement on the market Implementation of risk management NGOs Pressure groups Special interest groups Public Public commenting EFSA Coordinate the peer review Write guidance
4 Guidance documents can impact product development timelines
5 12 Expectations of a Guidance Document (GD) Build on previous guidance to solve and fix problems (ICPPR, EPPO, SANCO) Be generated as part of a clear process with concept paper to define the framework, scale of revision and time scales Expert input based on scientific excellence, not affiliation Separate from an opinion translate an opinion into a workable regulatory process Needs to be designed to be used Each GD should have a tiered approach with reasonably spaced tiers to screen out substances of low concern All methodology should have been tested or validated in collaborative trials or have a guideline published by a reputable organization, in which such testing and validation has been undertaken, e.g. OECD Be subject to a testing and validation phase before implementation to demonstrate that the GD is fit for purpose Have a sensible and practical implementation phase that is appropriate for the new GD to be met Clear and concise, save time Useable by appropriately qualified persons Resolve uncertainties not just list them Applicable to the available risk assessment framework and toolbox
6 What does the new guidance bring? More species for risk assessment Honey bees (Apis mellifera) Bumble bees (Bombus terrestris) Solitary bees (Osmia spp.) As in all areas of regulatory ecotox they are a sentinel species
7 New laboratory data requirements: Honey bees Honey bee Methods Acute oral adult OECD 213 Acute contract adult OECD 214 Chronic 10 day adult None (poss. dev based on OCED 213) Chronic 28 day larval development None (7 day OECD 237) Hyphopharyngeal gland (HPG) development None (questioned relevance to risk assessment) Only two of the methods are existing and validated Chronic test needs development and validation Larval test available does not meet GD aspirations Histopath endpoint for an invertebrate species at the screening tier?
8 New laboratory data requirements Bumble bees Acute oral adult Acute contract adult Chronic 10 day adult Chronic larval development Solitary bees Bumble and solitary bees Almost none are available Acute oral adult Acute contract adult Methods None (possible dev based on HB test) ICPPR group working on acute contact/oral Bumble bee Chronic larval development None (possible dev based on HB test) None (possible dev based on HB test) To have such methods validated, ring tested and published is Questionable larvae cannot be handled many years work Need to prioritize methods Methods Which will bring the most to the risk assessment? None (limited experience) None (limited experience) Technical challenges will a test work? Is it feasible? (e.g. Chronic 10 day adult None (limited experience) solitary bee development lasts 1 year) Univoltine species (test >1 year)
9 Protection goals SPG (specific protection goals) based on ecosystem services were defined according to using EFSA methodology Magnitude of effects cannot exceed 7% reduction in colony size Forager mortality cannot be increased compared to the control 1.5x for six days or 2 for three days or 3 for two days Honey production excluded Level of protection (includes an exposure assessment goal) of 90 th percentile exposure So that 90% of all colonies at the edge of a treated field in one regulatory zone should be exposed to a lower quantity than in the risk assessment Does not fit with uniform principles and decision making Realistic worse case exposure under normal conditions of use (the unless clause of the uniform principles)
10 SO WHAT IS THE POTENTIAL IMPACT OF THE NEW GUIDANCE? Where are the pinch points? Is the new guidance realistic Do I have the tools? How useable is it? Are the extra safety factors reasonable? Let s take a look with data from 150 substances and 163 uses for spray uses
11 Acute risk assessment to honey bees % number of uses passing the screening RA for foliar applications Use HQ contact (<50) HQ contact (<42 or 85) HQ oral (<50) ETR oral (<0.2) Herbicides Fungicides Insecticides Others All Previous HQ values checked against field data: Smart & Stevenson (1982): Bee World, 63, Mineau et al. (2008): Environ. Entomol. 37(2): (2008) Confirmed by EFSA mathematically (42 and 85 similar to 50)
12 Acute risk assessment to non-apis bees % number of uses passing the screening RA for foliar applications Use Bumble bee Solitary bee HQ contact (<0.7/1.4) HQ oral (<0.0036) HQ oral (<0.8/1.6) ETR oral (<0.004) Herbicides Fungicides Insecticides Others All No validation vs. field data: Mathematical calculations by EFSA Compared to honey bee all uses 82% (contact) and 74% (oral) Majority of substances would be triggered into higher tier testing
13 Chronic risk assessment to adult honey, bumble and solitary bees % number of uses passing the ETR chronic adult risk assessment Use HB (<0.03) BB (< ) SB (< ) Herbicides Fungicides Insecticides Others All % - 100% of all uses require higher tier refinement Assumes chronic oral 10 day LD50 = 0.1x acute LD50 Industry (end users) are scaremongering!!!
14 Revised chronic risk assessment to adult honey, bumble and solitary bees Use % number of uses passing the ETR chronic adult risk assessment Honey bee (<0.03) Bumble bee (< ) Solitary bee (< ) Endpoint (acute LD50) 0.1x 0.2x 1x 0.1x 0.2x 1x 0.1x 0.2x 1x Herbicides Fungicides Insecticides Others All Using more liberal estimates for chronic endpoints improvement For honey bees but still 82 to 66% of all uses require higher tier
15 Why does the risk assessment not discriminate low from high toxicity products? SPG: 90 th percentile exposure, so that 90 th of colonies at the edge of field experience lower exposure 90 th %ile residues (or max of 5 field tests), 90 th %ile consumption, safety factors SPG: Magnitude of effects < 7% reduction in colony size Trigger values built on lowest observed mortality X safety factors Exposure range + Uncertainty factors / outliers + Uncertainty factors / outliers Effect range Low risk range certain Risk range: overlap of uncertainties Built up on uncertainties, and the resulting level of protection is >>> 90 th or 7% effect
16 How can I pass the chronic risk assessment? Back calculations to find what chronic LD50 is necessary to pass using the honey bee as the test species Triggers for BB and SB are 5-6x lower Different SV for each type of bee Additional safety factor of 10x when using HB endpoints Example for a product applied at 200 g as/ha in arable crops Bee Dose (µg/bee/day) Concentration µg/ml in 10% sugar a.s. as % of bw consumed in 10 days Factor of spray solution conc.(200l/ga) Honey bee % 2.5x Bumble bee % 277x Solitary bee % 137x In practical terms doses cannot be administered due to solubility and repellence issues even for non-toxic substances
17 Refinement of exposure Field trials 5x exposure field trials per regulatory zone (take the highest? Mean? Value?) Extreme levels of refinement E.g. for a substance applied at 200 g as/ha, LD µg as/bee Level of exposure refinement necessary to pass risk assessment (200 g as/ha) Bee HQc ETRoral ETRchronic ETRlarvae Honey bee None None 5.0x None Bumble bee 2.9x 6.2x 467x None Solitary bee 2.5x 2.8x 169x None None = no refinement necessary passes risk assessment Refinement of x are unlikely unless exposure estimates in GD are extreme Refinement levels 10x higher for 2000 g as/ha applications
18 Effect refinement Semi-field and Field tests Must meet exposure goal (easy in tunnel) Must meet statistical effects goal (to able to detect 7% difference from control) Field tests require colonies per study Bumble bee field tests very difficult Low fidelity with crop (30% of OSR pollen when at edge of field) Solitary bee field tests Unknown area of regulatory research Commercially available v wild populations If goal is so necessary why it is impossible to achieve? Proposal: Use well conducted field and semi-field tests under realistic worse case exposure under normal conditions of use
19 Example: field study to meet exposure goal and statistical needs (Honey bees) 16 km 28 Fields 4 km apart 186 colonies (7 colonies/field) 28 km 2 Km 2 Ha
20 WHAT DOES THE NEW GUIDANCE MEAN FOR ME? Lots of reading Questions from my boss Changes to workload Changes to testing Changes to the risk assessment Increased cost of development Delays in product registration Possible loss of products
21 End user view worried Highly conservative risk assessment Lack of validated test methods Most substances will require higher tier risk assessment Exposure refinement unlikely to be successful Effects refinement in field trials are practically impossible We need a solution
22 Recommendations Guidance document in its current form is not ready for implementation Too complex, not discriminatory, leads to risk assessment cul de sac (dead end) BUT Lot of valuable work Eventually could be developed into a workable document Further work on exposure Reduce no. scenarios to those most relevant Development appropriate tests Calibrate risk assessment Involvement of all key stakeholders to produce workable GD E.g. Industry, ICPPR, OECD, member states
EFSA Guidance Document on the Risk Assessment of Plant Protection Products on bees (Apis mellifera, Bombus spp. and solitary bees)
EFSA Guidance Document on the Risk Assessment of Plant Protection Products on bees (Apis mellifera, Bombus spp. and solitary bees) Csaba Szentes, EFSA 16/10/2013, SETAC, SESSS08 Bee mandate M-2011-0185
More informationEFSA Guidance Document on the risk assessment of plant protection products on bees (Apis mellifera, Bombus spp. and solitary bees) 1
EFSA Journal 2013;11(7):3295 GUIDANCE OF EFSA EFSA Guidance Document on the risk assessment of plant protection products on bees (Apis mellifera, Bombus spp. and solitary bees) 1 European Food Safety Authority
More informationDATA REQUIREMENTS AND RISK ASSESSMENT FOR BEES PLANT PROTECTION. National approach for Belgium
PLANT PROTECTION DATA REQUIREMENTS AND RISK ASSESSMENT FOR BEES National approach for Belgium Federal Public Service Health, Food Chain Safety and Environment Service Plant protection products and Fertilizers
More informationAssessing Pesticide Risks to Bees
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1 Assessing Pesticide Risks to Bees Environmental Fate and Effects Division Office of Pesticide Programs January 2015 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2 Briefing
More informationPOS/17/LO/ June Executive Summary
POS/17/LO/28028 09 June 2017 Proposal for a protective and workable regulatory European bee risk assessment scheme based on the EFSA bee guidance and other new data and available approaches Executive Summary
More informationCONCLUSION ON PESTICIDES PEER REVIEW
CONCLUSION ON PESTICIDES PEER REVIEW APPROVED: 11 October 2016 doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2016.4606 Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment for the active substance clothianidin in light of confirmatory
More informationConclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment for bees for the active substance thiamethoxam 1
Suggested citation: European Food Safety Authority; Conclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment for for the active substance thiamethoxam.. [68 pp.] doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2013.3067. Available
More informationChallenges in environmental risk assessment (ERA) for birds and mammals and link to endocrine disruption (ED) Katharina Ott, BASF SE, Crop Protection
Challenges in environmental risk assessment (ERA) for birds and mammals and link to endocrine disruption (ED) Katharina Ott, BASF SE, Crop Protection Charles River Symposium, Den Bosch, 3rd October 2017
More informationBee Life. May EFSA Guidance : New methodologies to assess the risks of pesticides on bees
Bee Life May 2015 EFSA Guidance : New methodologies to assess the risks of pesticides on bees BEE LIFE EUROPEAN BEEKEEPING COORDINATION ASBL 4, Place Croix du Sud B-1348 Louvain-la-Neuve Belgium +32 10
More informationCONCLUSION ON PESTICIDES PEER REVIEW
CONCLUSION ON PESTICIDES PEER REVIEW APPROVED: 11 October 2016 doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2016.4607 Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment for the active substance imidacloprid in light of confirmatory
More informationEFSA Conclusions on neonicotinoids
EFSA Conclusions on neonicotinoids Rachel Sharp Pesticides Unit Copa-Cogeca Working Party on Honey 25/02/13 1 Structure The Commission s mandate (question) The process EFSA (2012) Data Risk assessment
More informationCONCLUSION ON PESTICIDE PEER REVIEW
EFSA Journal 2015;13(8):4211 CONCLUSION ON PESTICIDE PEER REVIEW Conclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment for bees for the active substance imidacloprid considering all uses other
More informationRisk assessment on non-target arthropods in the EU. Edition date: June 2018 Realisation: tier3 solutions GmbH Leverkusen
Risk assessment on non-target arthropods in the EU Edition date: June 2018 Realisation: tier3 solutions GmbH Leverkusen Overview Data requirements (European Union) Guidance documents Basic study types
More informationCONCLUSION ON PESTICIDES PEER REVIEW
CONCLUSION ON PESTICIDES PEER REVIEW APPROVED: 1 February 2018 doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5179 Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment for bees for the active substance thiamethoxam considering the
More informationCONCLUSION ON PESTICIDES PEER REVIEW
CONCLUSION ON PESTICIDES PEER REVIEW APPROVED: 1 February 2018 doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5177 Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment for bees for the active substance clothianidin considering the
More informationCumulative risk assessment legal
Technical Meeting with stakeholders on Cumulative Risk Assessment Cumulative risk assessment legal framework and perspective of DG SANCO Veerle Vanheusden Almut Bitterhof European Commission DG Overview
More informationEFSA s perspective on risk assessment of chemical mixtures
EFSA s perspective on risk assessment of chemical mixtures Christer Hogstrand King s College London Jean-Lou Dorne European Food Safety Authority, Scientific Committee Past Activities on Chemical Mixtures
More informationEuropean Food Safety Authority (EFSA)
TECHNICAL REPORT APPROVED: 03/05/2017 doi:10.2903/sp.efsa.2017.en-1223 Outcome of the consultation with Member States, the applicant and EFSA on the pesticide risk assessment for L-ascorbic acid in light
More informationOpinions of consultants on risk assessment procedures. James Garratt Enviresearch
Opinions of consultants on risk assessment procedures James Garratt Enviresearch The brief Describe consultants view on the changes to risk assessment procedures over the last 25 years Not limited to my
More informationTECHNICAL REPORT. European Food Safety Authority 2, 3. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Parma, Italy
EFSA supporting publication 2013: EN-452 TECHNICAL REPORT Outcome of the Second Round of Public Consultation on the draft Guidance Document on the Risk Assessment of Plant Protection Products on Bees (Apis
More informationRecent Developments and Future Plans in the EFSA Assessments of Pesticides. Hermine Reich Pesticides Unit
Recent Developments and Future Plans in the EFSA Assessments of Pesticides Hermine Reich Pesticides Unit Pesticides Unit and Panel activities Scientific Panel on Plant Protection Product and their Residues
More informationEFSA work on Cumulative Risk Assessment of pesticides. Luc Mohimont EFSA Pesticides Unit EuroMix Project 20/05/2015
EFSA work on Cumulative Risk Assessment of pesticides Luc Mohimont EFSA Pesticides Unit EuroMix Project 20/05/2015 Content State of Play with the dietary cumulative risk assessment in EFSA Establishment
More informationGuidance Document on Risk Assessment for Birds and Mammals Suggested Structure of the Revised Guidance Document
Guidance Document on Risk Assessment for Birds and Mammals Suggested Structure of the Revised Guidance Document Andreas Höllrigl-Rosta, Umweltbundesamt; Germany 1 Preparation of GD Sub Group Modelling
More informationREPORT OF THE SPECIAL ADVISORY FORUM MEETING ON EU GMO RISK ASSESSMENT
REPORT OF THE SPECIAL ADVISORY FORUM MEETING ON EU GMO RISK ASSESSMENT 13 November 2007 Introduction Over 60 EU GMO risk assessment experts, nominated by the Advisory Forum members and representing the
More informationOutcome of the peer review of bee study protocols submitted by Bayer CropScience AG to assess the effects of imidacloprid on bees 1
EFSA supporting publication 2014:EN-601 TECHNICAL REPORT Outcome of the peer review of bee study protocols submitted by Bayer CropScience AG to assess the effects of imidacloprid on bees 1 European Food
More informationEuropean Food Safety Authority (EFSA)
TECHNICAL REPORT APPROVED: 06 April 2017 doi:10.2903/sp.efsa.2017.en-1210 Outcome of the preliminary pesticides peer review meeting on the assessment of endocrine disrupting properties in mammalian toxicology
More informationExtrapolation of Acute Toxicity Across Bee Species
Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management Volume 12, Number 4 pp. 622 626 622 2015 SETAC Extrapolation of Acute Toxicity Across Bee Species Helen Thompson*y ysyngenta, Jealott's Hill International
More informationC.16. HONEYBEES - AC UTE ORAL TOXICITY TEST. This acute toxicity test method is a replicate of the OECD TG 213 (1998).
C.16. HONEYBEES - AC UTE ORAL TOXICITY TEST 1. METHOD This acute toxicity test method is a replicate of the OECD TG 213 (1998). 1.1 INTRODUCTION This toxicity test is a laboratory method, designed to assess
More informationModule 34: Legal aspects, ADI and GRAS status of food additives
Paper No.: 13 Paper Title: FOOD ADDITIVES Module 34: Legal aspects, ADI and GRAS status of food additives 34.1 Legal Aspects of Food Additives The data provided by Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives
More informationQuestions and Answers on Candidates for Substitution
Questions and Answers on Candidates for Substitution Rev. 1, January 2015 Background The European Commission is required by Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 ( the Regulation ) to establish a list of substances
More informationCOMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 1. Review report for the active substance Copper compounds
EUROPEAN COMMISSION HEALTH AND CONSUMERS DIRECTORATE-GENERAL Directorate E Safety of the food chain Unit E.3 - Chemicals, contaminants, pesticides COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 1 Review report for
More informationCONCLUSION ON PESTICIDE PEER REVIEW. Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance diflubenzuron 1. Issued on 16 July 2009
Summary of the EFSA Scientific Report (2009) 332, 1-5 CONCLUSION ON PESTICIDE PEER REVIEW Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance diflubenzuron 1 (Question No EFSA-Q-2009-00240)
More informationC.17. HONEYBEES - AC UTE CONTACT TOXICITY TEST. This acute toxicity test method is a replicate of the OECD TG 214 (1998).
C.17. HONEYBEES - AC UTE CONTACT TOXICITY TEST 1. METHOD This acute toxicity test method is a replicate of the OECD TG 214 (1998). 1.1 INTRODUCTION This toxicity test is a laboratory method, designed to
More informationEuropean Food Safety Authority (EFSA)
STATEMENT ADOPTED: 5 July 2018 doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5383 Statement on the impact of the harmonised classification on the conclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active
More informationVVH BELOUKHA Page 1 of 29. REGISTRATION REPORT Part A. Risk Management
Page 1 of 29 REGISTRATION REPORT Part A Risk Management Product code: Product name(s): Active Substance(s): NONANOIC ACID (EC), 680 g/l (CAS No.112-05-0) COUNTRY: Zonal Rapporteur Member State: France
More informationUncertainties in Dietary Exposure Analysis A Challenge to Be Addressed
Uncertainties in Dietary Exposure Analysis A Challenge to Be Addressed Dr David Tennant Food Chemical Risk Analysis, UK Conflict of interest regarding this presentation: I wish to declare a potential conflict
More informationFeedback from the Member States questionnaire
Annex 6 Feedback from the Member States questionnaire Reinhilde A.R. Schoonjans Special meeting of the EFSA Advisory Forum on GMO risk assessment in Europe 13 November 2007, Brussels Topics 1. Highlights
More informationThe regulatory landscape. The now and the not yet
The regulatory landscape The now and the not yet Perspectives Aims Promote common understanding Anticipate the coming changes Prepare for afternoon sessions Who governs pesticides? All EU legislation comes
More informationGenotoxicity Testing Strategies: application of the EFSA SC opinion to different legal frameworks in the food and feed area
Genotoxicity Testing Strategies: application of the EFSA SC opinion to different legal frameworks in the food and feed area Juan Manuel Parra Morte. Pesticides Unit. EFSA. 19th Annual Conference of the
More informationFOOD FORTIFICATION LEGISLATION AND STANDARDS: IN PRACTICE PHILIP RANDALL (WITH CONTRIBUTIONS FROM QUENTIN JOHNSON)
FOOD FORTIFICATION LEGISLATION AND STANDARDS: IN PRACTICE PHILIP RANDALL (WITH CONTRIBUTIONS FROM QUENTIN JOHNSON) HOW ARROGANT ARE WE THAT WE DO NOT EVEN PROBE OR QUESTION OUR ABILITY TO COMPLY WITH LEGISLATION
More informationMaximum Residue Limits
Maximum Residue Limits a scientific approach to ensure consumer safety ànd (food) animal health Prof Dr Erik De Ridder 1 Residues & safety: ADME Metabolism Distribution Excretion Administration Absorption
More information- laboratory toxicity tests
Tier 2 Effects and Risk Assessment - laboratory toxicity tests Dan Pickford Info Session on Aquatic Guidance 6/7 November 2013 1 Higher Tier Laboratory Tests Reduce uncertainty in the risk assessment -
More informationDietary exposure for risk assessment of GM foods. Ad hoc meeting with industry representatives Parma,
Dietary exposure for risk assessment of GM foods Ad hoc meeting with industry representatives Parma, 24.10.2018 - Dietary exposure in the risk assessment of GM foods - How to estimate dietary exposure
More informationEFSA Statement regarding the EU assessment of glyphosate and the socalled
EFSA Statement regarding the EU assessment of glyphosate and the socalled Monsanto papers Background On 29 May 2017, EFSA received a request from the European Commission to produce a statement concerning
More informationCumulative Risk Assessment
Cumulative Risk Assessment Acropolis - Better tools Jørgen Schlundt Bodil Hamborg Jensen Risk Analysis - DK Risk Assessment National Food Institute Independent science Risk Management Danish Vet. And Food
More informationCase study 5: Risk assessment for in soil organisms: future approaches and perspective
Case study 5: Risk assessment for in soil organisms: future approaches and perspective Maria Arena Pesticides Unit, EFSA Topical Scientific Workshop on Soil Risk Assessment ECHA, Helsinki, 7-8 October
More informationBackground EVM. FAO/WHO technical workshop on nutrient risk assessment, Geneva, May 2005, published 2006.
UK GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION S DISCUSSION PAPER ON THE SETTING OF MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM AMOUNTS FOR VITAMINS AND MINERALS IN FOODSTUFFS. Background The United Kingdom (UK) Government
More informationEFSA GD on dermal absorption Industry feedback and considerations on bridging opportunities
EFSA GD on dermal absorption Industry feedback and considerations on bridging opportunities ECPA TEAM: Aggarwal M. 1, Fisher P. 3, Parr-Dobrzanski B. 5, Soufi M. 2, Strupp C. (Chair) 6 1 Dow AgroSciences;
More informationAssessment of the toxicity of combination products for organisms
Appendix A: Combination toxicity (Ecotoxicology) Category: Plant protection products Assessment of the toxicity of combination products for organisms 1. Introduction According to the Uniform principles
More informationCase Study Application of the WHO Framework for Combined Exposures. Presented by: M.E. (Bette) Meek University of Ottawa
Case Study Application of the WHO Framework for Combined Exposures Presented by: M.E. (Bette) Meek University of Ottawa bmeek@uottawa.ca WHO IPCS Framework for Combined Exposures Objectives Building on
More informationTECHNICAL REPORT. European Food Safety Authority 2. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Parma, Italy
supporting publication 2014:EN-680 TECHNICAL REPORT Outcome of the consultation with Member States, the applicant and on the pesticide risk assessment of for the active substance difenoconazole 1 European
More informationPROPOSAL FOR A NEW GUIDELINE FOR THE TESTING OF CHEMICALS. Bumblebee, Acute Oral Toxicity Test
DRAFT, August 0 0 0 0 0 PROPOSAL FOR A NEW GUIDELINE FOR THE TESTING OF CHEMICALS Bumblebee, Acute Oral Toxicity Test INTRODUCTION. This test guideline is a laboratory test method, designed to assess the
More information- Determining the Causes - Dr. Diana Cox-Foster Pennsylvania State University
Colony Collapse Disorder - Determining the Causes - Dr. Diana Cox-Foster Pennsylvania State University Honey Bees in US Agriculture and the Colony Collapse Disorder Essential for pollination of over 100
More informationConclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance triasulfuron 1
EFSA Journal 2015;13(1):3958 CONCLUSION ON PESTICIDE PEER REVIEW Conclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance triasulfuron 1 ABSTRACT European Food Safety Authority
More informationChlormequat SANCO/175/08 final 7 May 2009
EUROPEAN COMMISSION HEALTH AND CONSUMERS DIRECTORATE-GENERAL Directorate E Safety of the food chain Unit E.3 - Chemicals, contaminants, pesticides Chlormequat SANCO/175/08 final 7 May 2009 Review report
More informationEFSA Guidance on residue definition for dietary risk assessment
EFSA Guidance on residue definition for dietary risk assessment First experiences of a Member State Dr. Tamara Coja (ERT) Residue part: Elisabeth Aranguiz Rebolledo EFSA technical meeting with stakeholders
More informationSurvey results - Analysis of higher tier studies submitted without testing proposals
Survey results - Analysis of higher tier studies submitted without testing proposals Submission of higher tier studies on vertebrate animals for REACH registration without a regulatory decision on testing
More informationOverview of the procedures currently used at EFSA for the assessment of dietary exposure to chemical substances
Overview of the procedures currently used at EFSA for the assessment of dietary exposure to chemical substances Davide Arcella Dietary and Chemical Monitoring (DCM) Unit Inputs Chemical Occurrence Hazard
More informationPremarket Review. FFDCA Section 201(s) FFDCA Section 201(s) (cont.)
FFDCA Section 201(s) intended use of which results or may reasonably be expected to result, directly or indirectly, in its becoming a component or otherwise affecting the characteristics of any food Mitchell
More informationGuidance on the Use of Probabilistic Methodology for Modelling Dietary Exposure to Pesticide Residues 1
SCIENTIFIC OPINION Guidance on the Use of Probabilistic Methodology for Modelling Dietary Exposure to Pesticide Residues 1 EFSA Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues (PPR) 2, 3 European
More informationFuture perspectives on Mixture Risk Assessment at EFSA
Future perspectives on Mixture Risk Assessment at EFSA Jean Lou Dorne Senior Scientific Officer Scientific Committee and Emerging Risks Unit European Food Safety Authority Scientific Committee Plenary
More informationSchmallenberg virus: Risk Management and Control Strategy in the EU
Schmallenberg virus: Risk Management and Control Strategy in the EU Francisco Reviriego Gordejo DG SANCO Brussels 2 April 2012 EU management: Coordination Timeline (1/3) December 2011: First raised by
More informationEvaluation of active substances in plant protection products Residues Anja Friel European Food Safetey Authority, Parma/ Italy
Evaluation of active substances in plant protection products Residues Anja Friel European Food Safetey Authority, Parma/ Italy European Conference on MRL-Setting for Biocides Berlin, 18-19 March 2014 Legal
More informationResponse to: Concept paper of 9 February 2011 submitted for public consultation by the European Commission on the
Response to: Concept paper of 9 February 2011 submitted for public consultation by the European Commission on the REVISION OF THE CLINICAL TRIALS DIRECTIVE 2001/20/EC Submitted by the European AIDS Treatment
More informationEuropean Food Safety Authority (EFSA)
TECHNICAL REPORT APPROVED: 11 April 2017 doi:10.2903/sp.efsa.2017.en-1213 Outcome of the consultation with Member States, the applicant and EFSA on the pesticide risk assessment for Straight Chain Lepidopteran
More informationECPA position paper on the criteria for the determination of endocrine disrupting properties under Regulation
POSITION PAPER 09/06/2016 PP/14/PD/23734 ECPA position paper on the criteria for the determination of endocrine disrupting properties under Regulation The European Commission is currently developing new
More informationStep by Step Approach for GPS Risk Assessment
Step by Step Approach for GPS Risk Assessment 1) Tier Categorization and Prioritization 2) Hazard Characterization By Mr. Krittanon Yuen-ying (Product Regulatory) Dow Chemical Thailand Limited Email: krittanon.yuen-ying@dow.com
More informationStatement on non-dietary exposure on diquat. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)
STATEMENT ADOPTED: 13 April 2018 doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5260 Statement on non-dietary exposure on diquat European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) Abstract In response to an application to renew the approval
More informationStatistical analysis of comparative data on composition and agronomic characteristics: new software tool and recurring issues identified
Statistical analysis of comparative data on composition and agronomic characteristics: new software tool and recurring issues identified C. Paoletti*, J. Perry and H. Broll* * EFSA GMO Unit; EFSA GMO Panel
More informationConclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance pyraflufen-ethyl 1
EFSA Journal 2015;13(2):4001 CONCLUSION ON PESTICIDE PEER REVIEW Conclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance pyraflufen-ethyl 1 European Food Safety Authority
More informationAPPROVED: 30 March 2015 PUBLISHED: 15 April 2015
TECHNICAL REPORT APPROVED: 30 March 2015 PUBLISHED: 15 April 2015 Outcome of the consultation with Member States, the applicant and EFSA on the pesticide risk assessment for 1-naphthylacetamide in light
More informationOpenFoodTox and Other Open Source In silico EFSA. Jean Lou Dorne Senior Scientific Officer Scientific Committee and Emerging Risks Unit EFSA
OpenFoodTox and Other Open Source In silico Tools @ EFSA Jean Lou Dorne Senior Scientific Officer Scientific Committee and Emerging Risks Unit EFSA EFSA FCM Network 10 th July 2017 Basic Principles in
More informationThe EU PIP - a step in Pediatric Drug Development. Thomas Severin Bonn,
The EU PIP - a step in Pediatric Drug Development Thomas Severin Bonn, 13.01.2009 Agenda Implications for Industry Company Preparation Time of PIP Submission Content of the PIP The PIP Process and first
More informationU.S. EPA Strategic Plan to Promote the Development and Implementation of Alternative Test Methods
U.S. EPA Strategic Plan to Promote the Development and Implementation of Alternative Test Methods Louis Scarano, US EPA SCHC Meeting April 25, 2018 Orlando,FL Statutory Mandate In 2016, TSCA was amended
More informationAction plan for improving the peer review process. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)
TECHNICAL REPORT APPROVED: 29 November 2017 doi:10.2903/sp.efsa.2017.en-1349 Action plan for improving the peer review process European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) Abstract This document reflects on the
More informationPsyllium Products and Blood Cholesterol Lowering
Psyllium Products and Blood Cholesterol Lowering Summary of Health Canada s Assessment of a Health Claim about Food Products Containing Psyllium and Blood Cholesterol Lowering December 2011 Bureau of Nutritional
More informationConclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance acetic acid 1
EFSA Journal 2013;11(1):3060 CONCLUSION ON PESTICIDE PEER REVIEW Conclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance acetic acid 1 European Food Safety Authority 2 European
More informationPT Proportion of diet obtained in the treated area. Joe Crocker, Central Science Laboratory; UK Christian Wolf, RIFCON GmbH; Germany
PT Proportion of diet obtained in the treated area Joe Crocker, Central Science Laboratory; UK Christian Wolf, RIFCON GmbH; Germany 1 What is PT? PT is defined as 'portion of diet obtained in treated area'
More informationThe "Cocktail-effect" Do pesticides play a role?
The "Cocktail-effect" Do pesticides play a role? /////////// Martin Larsson Researcher & Regulatory Scientist Bayer Crop Science, Denmark 9 November 2018 Talking points Why are we discussing potential
More informationAnimal testing versus calculation method
Animal testing versus calculation method Dr. Tamara Coja, MSc Toxicology Institute for Plant Protection Products, Department for Toxicology Interzonal workshop Harmonisation of risk assessment in section
More informationPesticide Steering Committee Minutes of the meeting dedicated to the Risk Assessment of Bees held on December 2013, Parma
PESTICIDES UNIT Pesticide Steering Committee Minutes of the meeting dedicated to the Risk Assessment of Bees held on 17 18 December 2013, Parma (Agreed on 18 02 2014) 1 Participants Network Representatives
More informationPROPOSED WORK PROGRAMME FOR THE CLEARING-HOUSE MECHANISM IN SUPPORT OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN FOR BIODIVERSITY Note by the Executive Secretary
CBD Distr. GENERAL UNEP/CBD/COP/11/31 30 July 2012 ORIGINAL: ENGLISH CONFERENCE OF THE PARTIES TO THE CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY Eleventh meeting Hyderabad, India, 8 19 October 2012 Item 3.2 of
More informationSpecial Review Decision: Imazapyr
Re-evaluation Note REV2016-02 Special Review Decision: Imazapyr (publié aussi en français) 7 January 2016 This document is published by the Health Canada Pest Management Regulatory Agency. For further
More informationCRD03. Introduction 1
Introduction 1 JOINT FAO/WHO FOOD STANDARDS PROGRAMME CODEX COMMITTEE ON PESTICIDE RESIDUES 48 th Session Chongqing, P.R. China, 25-30 April 2016 DISCUSSION PAPER REVISITING THE INTERNATIONAL ESTIMATE
More informationConclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance L-ascorbic acid 1
EFSA Journal 2013;11(4):3197 CONCLUSION ON PESTICIDE PEER REVIEW Conclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance L-ascorbic acid 1 ABSTRACT European Food Safety Authority
More informationAbout PVC stabilisers and Sustainability PVC Cables 2014 Workshop
About PVC stabilisers and Sustainability PVC Cables 2014 Workshop 20 th November 2014, Bologna (IT) Dr. Alain Cavallero Content About ESPA Sustainability: definition, measure and other considerations Sustainability
More informationBACKGROUND + GENERAL COMMENTS
Response on behalf of Sobi (Swedish Orphan Biovitrum AB) to the European Commission s Public Consultation on a Commission Notice on the Application of Articles 3, 5 and 7 of Regulation (EC) No. 141/2000
More informationTECHNICAL REPORT. European Food Safety Authority 2, 3. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Parma, Italy
TECHNICAL REPORT Outcome of the Public Consultation on the Draft Scientific Opinion on the science behind the guidance for scenario selection and scenario parameterisation for predicting environmental
More informationFAZ10 (CYMTER WG) Page 1 of 26. REGISTRATION REPORT Part A. Risk Management
Page 1 of 26 REGISTRATION REPORT Part A Risk Management Product code: FAZ10FAZ10 Product name(s): CYMTER WG Active Substance(s): Cymoxanil, 40 g/kg Mancozeb, 465 g/kg COUNTRY: FRANCE Zonal Rapporteur Member
More informationMHRA Pharmacovigilance System Master File (PSMF) Inspection Findings
MHRA Pharmacovigilance System Master File (PSMF) Inspection Findings Gretel Sakyi Medical Information and Patient Safety Manager AstraZeneca UK 07 June 2018 Agenda MHRA inspections How inspectors use the
More informationOECD/OCDE 245 Adopted: 9 October 2017
Adopted: 9 October 2017 OECD GUIDELINE FOR THE TESTING OF CHEMICALS HONEY BEE (APIS MELLIFERA L.), CHRONIC ORAL TOXICITY TEST (10-DAY FEEDING) INTRODUCTION 1. This Test Guideline describes a chronic oral
More informationDraft Statement on Exposure Assessment of Food Enzymes
Draft Statement on Exposure Assessment of Food Enzymes Christina Tlustos CEF Panel Member Info Session on Applications Food Enzymes Technical meeting with stakeholders on refinement of exposure estimates
More informationEUROPEAN COMMISSION HEALTH AND CONSUMERS DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FINAL
EURPEAN CMMISSIN HEALTH AND CNSUMERS DIRECTRATEGENERAL Directate E Safety of the food chain Unit E.3 Chemicals, contaminants, pesticides Sodium 5nitroguaiacolate, sodium o, sodium p SANC/210/08 rev. 2
More informationConclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of confirmatory data submitted for the active substance dichlorprop-p 1
EFSA Journal 2012;10(11):2950 CONCLUSION ON PESTICIDE PEER REVIEW Conclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of confirmatory data submitted for the active 1 ABSTRACT European Food Safety
More informationAPPROVED: 17 March 2015 PUBLISHED: 27 March 2015
TECHNICAL REPORT APPROVED: 17 March 2015 PUBLISHED: 27 March 2015 Outcome of the consultation with Member States, the applicant and EFSA on the pesticide risk assessment for tall oil crude in light of
More informationConclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance cyflumetofen 1
EFSA Journal 2012;10(1):2504 CONCLUSION ON PESTICIDE PEER REVIEW Conclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance cyflumetofen 1 European Food Safety Authority 2 European
More informationGuidance on the Use of Probabilistic Methodology for Modelling Dietary Exposure to Pesticide Residues 1
DRAFT SCIENTIFIC OPINION Guidance on the Use of Probabilistic Methodology for Modelling Dietary Exposure to Pesticide Residues 1 EFSA Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues (PPR) 2, 3 European
More informationConclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance blood meal 1
CONCLUSION ON PESTICIDE PEER REVIEW Conclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance blood meal 1 European Food Safety Authority 2 European Food Safety Authority (EFSA),
More information1 OJ L 354, , p OJ L 80, , p. 19.
Call for scientific and technical data on the permitted food additives sulphur dioxide (E 220), sodium sulphite (E 221), sodium bisulphite (E 222), sodium metabisulphite (E 223), potassium metabisulphite
More informationin the ICH Regions Table of Content Annexes to Guideline and 3. Why is Q4B necessary? Q4B Annexes? for Human Use
Frequently Asked Questions Q4B: Evaluation and Recommendation of Pharmacopoeial Texts for Use in the ICH Regions The Q4B Expert Working Group developed a set of frequently asked questions to help users
More information