Safety Emporium eyewashes
Safety Emporium eyewashes

Interactive Learning Paradigms, Incorporated

DCHAS-L Discussion List Archive

About This Archive  |   DCHAS-L 2013 Index   |   DCHAS-L Yearly Index   |   DCHAS-L Home Page

About This Archive

DCHAS-L 2013 Index

DCHAS-L Yearly Index

DCHAS-L Home Page


Previous by Date

Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Congratulations, Diane!

Date: Nov 21, 2013 13:15 UTC

Author: bkgarebe**At_Symbol_Here**GMAIL.COM

Next by Date

Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] GHS Busters

Date: Nov 21, 2013 18:24 UTC

Author: Monona Rossol <actsnyc**At_Symbol_Here**cs.com>

Subject context

From: Ralph B. Stuart <rstuart**At_Symbol_Here**CORNELL.EDU>

Subject: [DCHAS-L] GHS Busters

Date: Nov 21, 2013 18:09 UTC

Reply-To: DCHAS-L

In-Reply-To:  

Demystify: 

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