xv
Foreword
analysis to come up with a single, relative, chemical-specific toxicity factor to rank
chemicals by their overall effect. The important point to keep in mind is that the
objective of this approach was not to come up with an absolute number that we claim
to represent the actual and fixed toxic impact of a chemical. Rather, the proposed
methodology was developed solely for the purposes of coming up with a logical
means of applying published and routinely used toxicological data to then develop
chemical-specific “toxicity” factors. These factors can then be used to conduct an
apples-to-apples comparison across chemicals to relatively rank the potential effect
among various toxic chemicals, such that reduction in the use of toxic chemicals can
be targeted and managed accordingly. We do not claim to be perfect in this analysis.
We welcome suggestions on how to improve our analysis or how to use the same or
additional toxicity data to relatively rank chemicals differently. The absence of ranking chemicals by some toxicity measure, and therefore not prioritizing which ones
to focus on eliminating, is not an option. Without some type of toxicity ranking, all
chemicals will be considered to be equally “bad.” The undertaking to reduce and
even eliminate use of all chemicals would therefore be overwhelming, and ultimately
nothing will be done to reach the next step in reducing overall toxicity.
Thomas E. Higgins
Foreword
analysis to come up with a single, relative, chemical-specific toxicity factor to rank
chemicals by their overall effect. The important point to keep in mind is that the
objective of this approach was not to come up with an absolute number that we claim
to represent the actual and fixed toxic impact of a chemical. Rather, the proposed
methodology was developed solely for the purposes of coming up with a logical
means of applying published and routinely used toxicological data to then develop
chemical-specific “toxicity” factors. These factors can then be used to conduct an
apples-to-apples comparison across chemicals to relatively rank the potential effect
among various toxic chemicals, such that reduction in the use of toxic chemicals can
be targeted and managed accordingly. We do not claim to be perfect in this analysis.
We welcome suggestions on how to improve our analysis or how to use the same or
additional toxicity data to relatively rank chemicals differently. The absence of ranking chemicals by some toxicity measure, and therefore not prioritizing which ones
to focus on eliminating, is not an option. Without some type of toxicity ranking, all
chemicals will be considered to be equally “bad.” The undertaking to reduce and
even eliminate use of all chemicals would therefore be overwhelming, and ultimately
nothing will be done to reach the next step in reducing overall toxicity.
Thomas E. Higgins
