@Diego, I think the perspective in the US regarding litigations is a little different from other parts of the world 
. But I do believe that there should be more public interactions to explain the “risk vs benefit” issue.
3 Likes
Thanks @Georgi for sharing the incidences and literature.
It is appreciable you are consistently doing research in the angle of “Nitrosamines induced photo carcinogenesis”
Hope it was also brought to notice of regulators.
Photosensitivity in terms of photo genotoxicity is still need to have much focus in terms of regulatory.
May be antihypertensive and ant-diabetic medications due to their and long term use could cause accumulation of these contaminants in the skin followed by photoreaction could trigger.
Agree- Ames and CPCA are not final screeners. Not only for nitrosamines to be fact, for any mutagen these are not final assays/tool that aids in decision. They just help to make initial screen or to get clue.
Carcinogenicity whether it is driven by mutagenicity or non-mutagenicity itself is a complex process in human physiology. Current regulatory assays address only to some extent.
Photogenotoxicity driven carcinogenicity might need more attention now after seeing all these incidences.
1 Like