Does the assessment identify uncertainty factors rather than hide them in a safe label?
Last reviewed: .
Does the assessment identify uncertainty factors rather than hide them in a safe label?
The company publishes no exposure model, so it states no margin of safety and no uncertainty factor.
The Validation page names Product Safety Labs, Study 65321, Study 65322, Study 65323 and Study 65324, and states that NanoFlashing™ is tested under Good Laboratory Practice to US EPA Health Effects Test Guidelines; each study was completed in 2024 on a sponsor-supplied sample. What it names is the record. Each of those studies describes one endpoint on that sample under the conditions it names, and none of them is an exposure assessment. The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.”
An assessment that needs the assumptions behind a calculation is arranged in writing, through [email protected] on the Contact page. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.
Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; Product Safety Labs, Study 65321, Study 65322, Study 65323 and Study 65324, 2024; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; C-POLAR — Contact, https://cpolar.tech/contact/.
Reviewed on .
Sources
- C-POLAR — Validation
- C-POLAR — Terms of Use
- C-POLAR — Contact
- Product Safety Labs, Study 65321, Study 65322, Study 65323 and Study 65324, 2024