Safety Emporium eyewashes
Safety Emporium eyewashes

Interactive Learning Paradigms, Incorporated

DCHAS-L Discussion List Archive


From: Ralph B. Stuart <rstuart**At_Symbol_Here**CORNELL.EDU>
Subject: [DCHAS-L] GHS Busters
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2013 18:09:41 +0000
Reply-To: DCHAS-L <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**MED.CORNELL.EDU>
Message-ID: 5564F9EDC11C09468EE5DAF02B5CB30F4C48E474**At_Symbol_Here**BY2PRD0410MB376.namprd04.prod.outlook.com


I noticed an interesting article at
https://www.swiftpage6.com/speasapage.aspx?X=2Y0RSDXNI9G1KQ0R00YEWW
about the challenge of GHS:

What does GHS stand for?

The Excercise
Chemwatch have undertaken a systematic comparison of GHS classification published by official sources in:

Europe (ECHA)
Japan (NITE)
New Zealand (CCID)
Korea (NIER)
A total of 12,452 Substances were reviewed.

Interestingly there was very little overlap between Substances reviewed by any two Jurisdictions - Korea and New Zealand reviewed 1494 Substances in common.

However, where Substances in common where assigned GHS Classifications, fewer than 8% were in agreement - New Zealand and the European Union agreed on only 75 Substances of 939 Substances.

In summary:

< 8% Harmonisation between any 2 Jurisdictions
< 0.6% Harmonisation between any 3 Jurisdictions
===
I'm not quite sure of what to make of this data. I wonder if anyone on the list has done international comparisons that include the US?

- Ralph

Ralph Stuart CIH
Chemical Hygiene Officer
Department of Environmental Health and Safety
Cornell University

rstuart**At_Symbol_Here**cornell.edu

Previous post   |  Top of Page   |   Next post