7 June 2016

The debate on endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) in the EU is more political than scientific, says toxicologist Christopher Borgert in an editorial published by EurActiv.com on 1 June 2016. A decision to ignore the question of potency would cause needless disruption to regulators, industries and consumers.

In May 2016, the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) issued a consensus statement intended to inform the European Commission’s decision regarding scientific criteria for EDC identification. It “was steered primarily by politics, not science; there is no new data to narrow the range of interpretations to a unified position,” Borgert writes. “The only specific scientific criterion often discussed in the consensus statement is the one it effectively dodged: potency.

“Like labeling common foods acidic hazards, the BfR consensus statement would allow chemicals to be labeled endocrine hazards in the EU, despite lacking sufficient potency to affect anyone’s endocrine system. By such standards, caffeine or cocoa would be endocrine hazards. That hardly seems consistent with the views of most Europeans, nor is it health-protective.”