首页> 外文期刊>Science, Technology and Human Values >To Test or Not to Test: Tools, Rules, and Corporate Data in US Chemicals Regulation
【24h】

To Test or Not to Test: Tools, Rules, and Corporate Data in US Chemicals Regulation

机译:测试或不测试:美国化学品规则的工具,规则和公司数据

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

When the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) was passed by the US Congress in 1976, its advocates pointed to new generation of genotoxicity tests as a way to systematically screen chemicals for carcinogenicity. However, in the end, TSCA did not require any new testing of commercial chemicals, including these rapid laboratory screens. In addition, although the Environmental Protection Agency was to make public data about the health effects of industrial chemicals, companies routinely used the agency's obligation to protect confidential business information to prevent such disclosures. This paper traces the contested history of TSCA and its provisions for testing, from the circulation of the first draft bill in the Nixon administration through the debates over its implementation, which stretched into the Reagan administration. The paucity of publicly available health and environmental data concerning chemicals, I argue, was a by-product of the law and its execution, leading to a situation of institutionalized ignorance, the underside of regulatory knowledge.
机译:当有毒物质控制法案(TSCA)于1976年通过美国国会通过时,其倡导者指出了新一代遗传毒性试验,作为系统筛选致癌性的一种方法。然而,最终,TSCA不需要任何对商业化学品的新测试,包括这些快速实验室屏幕。此外,虽然环保机构是对工业化学品的健康影响的公共数据,但公司经常使用该机构的义务保护机密商业信息,以防止此类披露。本文追溯了TSCA的有争议的历史,并从尼克松管理层的第一次草案的流通通过辩论延伸到Regan行政当局的辩论中,从尼克松管理局的第一次票据的流通。我争论的公开可用健康和环境数据的缺乏是法律的副产品及其执行,导致制度化无知的情况,监管知识的下面。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号