Search

Enclosed are comments on the recent notice from the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment regarding 22 chemicals to be discussed at a meeting of the Developmental and Reproductive Toxicant Identification Committee. These comments address manganese.

These comments address the four parabens that are on the prioritization list. As these ingredients serve an important preservative function and have been extensively reviewed and approved by expert bodies, they should be considered low priority for DARTIC review.

As FDA is recognized as an authoritative body by Proposition 65, we believe that OEHHA should await the outcome of FDA's review rather than bringing BP-3 to the DARTIC for review.

Enclosed are comments regarding the OEHHA draft report entitled " Health Effects Assessment: Potential Neurobehavioral Effects of Synthetic Food Dyes in Children."

Comments on proposed revisions to the Proposition 65 prioritization procedure submitted by the Consumer Healthcare Products Association, Grocery Manufacturers of America, and the National Food Processors Association.

CHPA does not believe that the Beneficial Nutrients Regulatory Concept is necessary or supportive of the intent of the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986.

These comments are submitted on behalf of a coalition that represents companies that manufacture, distribute, and sell many of the foods, beverages, OTC medicines, nutritional supplements, and personal care products consumed or used by Californians every day.

We strongly urge the CIC not to “list” acetaminophen as a carcinogen due to the lack of evidence that it has been “clearly shown” to cause cancer, and due to the unnecessary confusion and fear it could cause among consumers and patients.

These comments address titanium dioxide nanoparticles, which serve an important function in numerous consumer products, including sunscreens.