Abstract
In Europe, there has been a scientific discussion on possible thresholds in chemical carcinogens since the late 1990s. Based on this discussion, the Scientific Committee on Occupational Exposure Limits (SCOEL) of the European Union has discussed a number of chemical carcinogens and has issued recommendations. For some carcinogens, health-based Occupational Exposure Limits (OELs) were recommended, while quantitative assessments of carcinogenic risks were performed for others. For purposes of setting OELs the following groups of carcinogens were adopted: (A) Non-threshold genotoxic carcinogens; for low-dose assessment of risk, the linear non-threshold (LNT) model appears appropriate. For these chemicals, the risk management may be based on the ALARA principle (”as low as reasonably achievable”), technical feasibility, and other socio-political considerations. (B) Genotoxic carcinogens, for which the existence of a threshold cannot be sufficiently supported at present. In these cases, the LNT model may be used as a default assumption, based on the scientific uncertainty, and the ALARA principle may be applied as well. (C) Genotoxic carcinogens with a practical threshold is supported by studies on mechanisms and/or toxicokinetics; health-based exposure limits may be based on an established no-observed adverse effect level (NOAEL). (D) Non-genotoxic carcinogens and non DNA-reactive carcinogens; for these compounds a true (”perfect”) threshold is associated with a clearly founded NOAEL. The mechanisms shown by tumor promoters, spindle poisons, topoisomerase II poisons and hormones are typical examples of this category. Health-based OELs are derived for carcinogens of Groups C and D, while a risk assessment is carried out for carcinogens of Groups A and B. In order to highlight the most important differentiation between Groups B and C, the basic reasoning is given for the six compounds formaldehyde, vinyl acetate, acrylonitrile, acrylamide, trichloroethylene and methylene chloride.