In an article published by the non-profit organization CHEM Trust, Michael Warhurst comments on the latest version of the European Commission’s (EC) revised draft criteria to identify endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs). The new texts were published by the EC on December 13, 2016 and are to be discussed with experts and Member States on December 21, 2016 (FPF reported). According to Warhurst, there are three issues with the current texts: 1) The draft criteria still require “too high a burden of evidence before a chemical can be identified as an EDC” (FPF reported), 2) the EC maintains a change to the derogation in the Plant Protection Products Regulation (PPPR) from ‘negligible exposure’ to ‘negligible risk’ which presents an “unacceptable loophole” allowing “continued use of endocrine disrupting pesticides,” and 3) the EC introduced a new exemption proposing that substances acting “by regulating moulting and/or growth of harmful organisms via their endocrine system” shall not be considered as EDCs for non-target organisms. Warhurst explains that with this exemption “other organisms may be harmed, such as benign invertebrates (eg. insects) which have moulting hormones.” Further, “as hormones have been conserved in evolution, these chemicals may have hormone disrupting effects on other species, such as vertebrate wildlife like frogs, fish or birds,” Warhurst alerts.
Michael Warhurst (December 14, 2016). “A bad Xmas present: new EDC criteria proposed by European Commission should be rejected.” CHEM Trust
ChemSec (December 19, 2016). “The Commission wants EDC agreement for Christmas, but fails to address serious concerns.”
Endocrine Society (December 19, 2016). “European Commission proposal leaves public exposed to harmful endocrine disrupting chemicals.“