Lancaster Chemistry research improves chemical risk policy through adapted systematic review methods

There is divergence in international regulatory policies on the safety of chemicals and the risks associated with their use or exposure. Lancaster researchers provided the first technical analysis comparing European chemical risk assessment to the ‘gold-standard’ Systematic Review Methods (SRM) used in medicine.

Research led by Professor Crispin Halsall and Dr Paul Whaley into the incorporation of systematic review methods in chemical risk assessment and the application of their SYRINA, COSTER and CREST tools has directly influenced risk assessment protocols and regulations within the European Food Safety Authority and the European Commission. It has influenced global health policy impact assessment methods at two UN agencies. This approach reduces bias and uncertainty providing unambiguous answers based on all of the evidence available.

• Quality appraisal tools (COSTER/CREST), which ensure best practice for implementing SRMs in environmental health, have now been used in over 50 published reviews.
• Led to appointment of Whaley as world’s first specialist SRM editor for Environment International, a leading environmental health journal. There have been 200 manuscripts submitted based on the COSTER and CREST frameworks. Codes of practice for conducting and reviewing systematic reviews in environmental health and toxicology have changed publishing practices on SRMs in leading health science journals.
• SRM has been adopted to assess progress of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, most notably Goal 8 - health and wellbeing in the working environment.
• Consulted for the EFSA, who were looking to re-evaluate their hazard assessment protocol for Bisphenol-A, used in protective linings for food and beverage cans. The COSTER/CREST framework led to a significant and documented improvement in the EFSA’s hazard assessment protocol.
• Coordinated scientific comments on draft Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals criteria, leading to a change in how evidence is assessed in evaluating whether chemicals are classified as endocrine disruptors. The changes were adopted by the European Parliament and the EU Commission, with implications for the 40 countries that follow these regulations, in particular manufacturers producing chemicals. Preventing exposure is estimated to save €163 billion across the EU in disease reduction and healthcare costs.
• SRM training programmes resulted in changes to the assessment of scientific evidence in the development of global evidence-based health guidelines by the United Nations World Health & International Labour Organisations (WHO/ILO) responsible for establishing the global burden of disease from occupational environmental exposures. Whaley and Halsall have provided training to the WHO/ILO, which led to a change in their methodologies for assessing scientific evidence in the development of global evidence- based health targets and guidelines.