by Dr Qasim Chaudhry, Vice-chair of the Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety and Chair of the Working Group on nanomaterials in cosmetic products

Recently the European Commission asked its independent Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS) to provide an Opinion on the safety of the nanoforms of Silica, Hydrated Silica, and surface modified silicas such as Silica Silylate and Silica Dimethyl Silylate. These nanomaterials are used in leave-on and rinse-off cosmetic products for the hair, skin, lips, face, and nails.

The Commission calls on the SCCS whenever there are concerns about health and safety risks concerning non-food consumer products, including cosmetics and their ingredients. Any use of nanomaterials in cosmetic products is regulated in the EU, and all cosmetic companies are required to notify the Commission six months prior to placing any nanomaterial containing products on the market.

The Commission may ask the SCCS to provide a scientific Opinion on risk assessment when it has received a notification concerning a particular ingredient which raises concerns about potential health effects for which adequate risk assessment has not been conducted. 

This was indeed the case here – in total 172 notifications were received for products that contained one or more of the four types of silica in nanoform. 

in accordance with its mandate, the SCCS examined the data submitted by the companies as well as relevant peer-led scientific studies published in the English language. At the end of this thorough examination, the SCCS concluded in their Opinion published on line in March 2015 that there is no evidence that silica in nanoform penetrate the skin or are toxic, but equally importantly, not enough evidence was provided to reliably rule out these possibilities.  

More nano-specific data is needed, particularly on the dermal penetration of the different types of nano-silica intended for use in cosmetic products, especially on cut or damaged skin, and on its potential systemic toxicity before these products could be considered safe or unsafe. 

In addition, some studies on a different type of nanosilica than those used in cosmetics have pointed out to potential genotoxic effects, so more research is needed to rule out the possibility that the nano silica types used in cosmetics have the same effect if taken up by cells.

Consumers can rest assured that the European Commission is vigilant about protecting their health and keeps abreast of any new developments in the use of chemical or nanomaterial ingredients in consumer products. As new evidence emerges, the SCCS will again review the safety of nanoform silica and publish its Opinion.

http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/health_food-safety/dyna/enews/enews.cfm?al_id=1594

In light of newly available information, the European Commission asked the Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR) for an update on earlier Opinions concerning electromagnetic field exposure (EMF).

EMF is a subject that interests and concerns people, since we are all exposed to it in our daily lives, to a greater or lesser extent depending on our lifestyles and where we live and work, and to a variety of frequencies. These frequencies range from extremely low (e.g. from power lines and electric power transformers) to intermediate (from induction hobs and other household appliances) to the radio frequency range (from mobile telephones and other devices). 

The most important scientific studies on EMF exposure and health published since the last Opinion (2009) were critically reviewed by the experts and commented upon in the new Opinion 'Potential health effects of exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF)', published on 27 January 2015. The scientific literature analysed includes more than 700 studies from 2009 onwards. In general, its conclusions are reassuring: the results of current scientific research show that there are no evident adverse health effects if exposure remains below the levels recommended by the EU legislation.

However, concerning the intermediate frequency range, an important source of exposure is induction hobs, which have become popular in recent years. These can expose their users to magnetic fields higher than the reference levels of exposure guidelines.

With reference to Radiofrequency range and the risk of cancer, the Opinion states that the evidence for increased brain cancer (glioma) risk became weaker, while the possibility of an association with cancer of the ear (acoustic neuroma) needs further investigation. Studies regarding childhood cancer in relation to exposure from broadcast transmitters do not indicate any association.

Some epidemiological studies would suggest an increase in risk of childhood leukaemia with exposure to extremely low fields. However, no mechanisms have been identified and no support from experimental studies could explain these findings, which, together with shortcomings of the epidemiological studies prevent a causal interpretation.

New studies did not find adverse health effects on reproduction or any symptoms associated with exposure to EMF. Recent studies did not confirm the previously suggested association between EMF and an increased risk of Alzheimer’s disease.

That said, there are still concerns, particularly about accumulated exposure from combined sources.  The SCENIHR has developed a set of prioritised research recommendations and methodological guidance on the experimental design and minimum requirements to ensure data quality and usability for risk assessment, which can also be found in the Opinion.

http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/health_food-safety/dyna/enews/enews.cfm?al_id=1581

Bisphenol A (BPA) is used as a plasticiser, meaning that it is used in plastic products to render them more pliable. People are widely exposed to BPA, primarily through food packaging, and the level of this exposure and its possible effects are widely debated in the scientific community.

BPA is also used in medical devices such as catheters and implants, and in some dental devices, and the Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR) was asked by the European Commission to examine any possible health risks associated with this type of use.

In most of these applications, including in dentistry, the amount of BPA people are exposed to is deemed not to pose adverse effects because it does not exceed the limit of the tolerable daily intake of 4 μg per kg body weight per day. Moreover, exposure to BPA through medical devices is usually only for a short period of time, while the tolerable daily intake assumes lifelong, continuous daily exposure.

The highest estimated exposure to BPA occurs during prolonged medical procedures especially for neonates in intensive care units, for infants undergoing prolonged medical procedures and for dialysis patients. Based on the available data, the SCENIHR concludes that risk of adverse effects from BPA might exist in such cases, since the exposure exceeds the reference value and the exposed population can be particularly vulnerable.  

The benefit of medical devices should also be taken into account: e.g. the survival of premature infants often depends on them. The possibility to replace BPA in these products should be considered against their efficiency in the treatment, as well as the toxicological profile of the alternative materials, when available.

http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/health_food-safety/dyna/enews/enews.cfm?al_id=1580

In response to a request by the European Commission for an updated Opinion on dental amalgam, the independent Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR) has recently published ‘The safety of dental amalgam and alternative dental restoration materials for patients and users".

Dental amalgam is 'silver' filling, made of an alloy of metals including elemental mercury, and there have been concerns about the health risks associated with the mercury vapours it produces.

These concerns have not, however, been substantiated by current scientific studies. After examining current scientific evidence, the SCENIHR found that neither dental amalgam nor alternative materials are harmful to the health of the general population in normal use circumstances.

While alternative fillings remain a viable choice for new fillings, it is not advisable to replace dental amalgam with alternatives unless the patient has shown an allergic reaction to it, because removing amalgam exposes the patient to more mercury than leaving them in. 

When choosing which material to use, patients and their dentists need to look at factors including whether the fillings are for primary or permanent teeth, which tooth the filling is intended for, and whether the patient has any allergies to mercury or to other components of the restorative materials.  As with any other medical or pharmaceutical intervention, caution should be exercised when considering the placement of any dental restorative material in pregnant women.

http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/health_food-safety/dyna/enews/enews.cfm?al_id=1591

Recent studies have shown that uptake of chromium VI through drinking water can lead to different types of cancer in the gastro-intestinal tract of experimental animals. At present, it cannot be excluded that chromium VI can also induce cancer in humans when taken up orally. For that reason, the virtual safe dose for chromium VI was lowered. Many manufactured goods contain chromium VI, including some children's toys. The EU Toy Safety Directive sets strict limits on the maximum amount of a chemical compound that is allowed to be transferred from a toy to a child, called the 'migration limit', on all toys sold in the EU. 

The European Commission asked its independent Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks (SCHER) to review the latest studies and to give its Opinion on Chromium VI in Toys. In its conclusions, the SCHER stated its opinion that the current migration limits for chromium VI from toys should be revised in line with the newly lowed virtual safe dose. Furthermore, to account for the uptake of Chromium VI from other sources such as drinking water and the environment, the SCHER recommends that any additional exposure to chromium VI from toys should be minimised to the lowest achievable levels when using best available technologies.

http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/health_food-safety/dyna/enews/enews.cfm?al_id=1566