29. 7. 85 Official Journal of the European Communities NoC 188/1 
II 
(Preparatory Acts) 
ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE 
Opinion on occupational cancer 
(85/C 188/01) 
On 12 and 13 December 1984 the Economic and Social Committee, acting under the fourth 
paragraph of Article 20 of its Rules of Procedure, decided to draw up an opinion on occu­
pational cancer. 
The Section for Social Questions, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work 
on the subject, adopted its opinion on 23 May 1985 in the light of the report by Mr Etty. 
At its 227th plenary session (meeting of 29 May 1985) the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following opinion unanimously: 
0. Preamble 
0.1. Occupational cancer is recognized as a serious 
problem in the protection of workers. The need for 
prevention and control has been emphasized by inter­
national and national actions and proposals, and by 
less formal but nevertheless valuable consultations, 
publications and measures, both industrial and scien­
tific. The Committee has sought to avoid repetition of 
both work already done in relation to definitions and in 
identification of already recognized carcinogenic risks 
in occupation, and has recognized the value of drafting 
proposals in accord with other obligations within the 
Community actions and within international agree­
ments. 
0.2. The point of departure for the Section is the view 
that efficient prevention of carcinogenic risks at the 
workplace is possible by protection of workers (i.e. 
industrial, agricultural and self-employed, etc.) against 
exposure. 
0.3. The opinion, noting that some Community instru­
ments already play a role in the control of some carci­
nogens, is concerned with an overall strategic approach 
to the prevention and control of occupational cancer 
rather than new detailed measures; this implies that 
steps to implement the general principles will be 
required in the Community by the preparation of a 
Directive under the Framework Directive, and by the adoption of appropriate actions for its fulfilment in 
Member States of the Community. 
1. General elements; the scope of the opinion 
1.1. The Committee, having considered definitions 
already prepared by bodies referred to in the preamble 
of the report, has adopted the following definition: 
'Occupational cancer means malignant neoplasms 
induced in workers as a result of exposure to a carci­
nogenic substance or agent in their work.' 
1.1.1. Carcinogenic substances and agents encompass 
not only chemical materials and physical agents speci­
fically required by the work process, but also exposures 
consequent to the work activity. Cancer may arise from 
physical, chemical and viral activity; in occupational 
cancer, attribution so far has been confined to the first 
two of these three but in certain occupations carcino­
genic viruses are encountered and therefore must be 
included in the scope of this document. 
1.2. The Committee considered a view that occupa­
tional carcinogens are not different in essence from 
other occupational hazards, but takes the approach that 
occupational carcinogens pose a hazard, with the 
following characteristics which, in combination, make 
it qualitatively different: 
No C 188/2 Official Journal of the European Communities 29. 7. 85 
(a) there is no proof of the existence of a safe level of 
exposure; 
(b) there is usually a long latency between exposure and 
the appearance and diagnosis of the disease, and by 
that time the disease may be irreversible; 
(c) the disease is difficult to predict and is often fatal. 
However, there are also forms which can be treated 
successfully. Screening procedures are only appli­
cable to certain forms of cancer and diagnosis and 
treatment have variable success; 
(d) making predictions about the susceptibility of 
individuals to the risk and effect of occupational 
cancer is not feasible. 
1.3. These factors emphasize the need for effective 
identification of carcinogenic substances and agents in 
the work environment, and for adequate preventive 
and control measures. They also make it essential to 
have full information and training systems. The 
following points of the opinion address these aspects in 
more detail. The measures discussed below should 
apply to carcinogenic agents/processes and the persons 
exposed or liable to be exposed to them. 
2. Classification of carcinogenic agents 
2.1. The problem of classification is a difficult one in 
the light of recommendations proposed elsewhere. The 
idea of ranking into categories of descending carcino­
genic potency and of application to collections of 
agents — tabulated according to specific measures such 
as prohibition, licensing, restriction, control, labelling, 
and so on — appears attractive on grounds of 
simplicity and of the ease of rule-making. However, 
there are great problems arising in classification of 
carcinogenic agents in this field. 
2.2. The question of prohibition is discussed below. 
The Committee recommends that all available informa­
tion is collected and assessed when identifying 
substances, agents and processes as carcinogenic 
hazard idicators. The social imperative to prevent 
workers from being exposed to carcinogenic agents 
(and thus, as the safest solution, to ban the use of them) 
has to be confronted with the technical-economic need 
to use them nevertheless, under certain conditions. 
2.3. Hazard identification and risk assessment are two 
fields where the Committee refrains from giving 
specific opinions, there being considerable technical 
information already available. It notes that the results 
of work of specialized agencies make it possible to list 
agents/processes, the carcinogenic potential of which is 
proven, probable or questionable. 
2.4. Concrete steps in the direction of risk limitation 
should be guided by the results of research and expert 
judgement. The Committee urges drawing up a risk 
limitation plan in which priority is given to the devel­opment of measures regarding agents/processes with a 
proven high carcinogenic potency. Elements for such a 
plan are listed below. 
3. Risk limitation 
3.1. Developing risk limitation measures should be a 
joint effort of governments, employers, and workers 
and their representatives. For employers and workers 
there is an important role in prevention, which should 
be backed up by appropriate legislation in certain 
areas. The competent authorities should be adequately 
informed of the preventive measures developed jointly 
by employers and workers and their representatives. 
3.2. If an agent/process is proved to be highly carcin­
ogenic, exposure should be proscribed; in cases where 
exposure cannot be avoided its use should be banned. 
Which, or whether both, measures should be taken shall 
be determined case by case Exemptions should be 
possible, if accompanied by strict safeguards, in cases 
where the use can be justified (e.g. for medical 
research). The use of carcinogens should always be 
scrupulously justified. If use cannot be justified, it 
should be banned. 
3.3. The principles laid down in this opinion need 
particular consideration in the case of new substances. 
These principles should be extended in such cases to a 
special evaluation of the carcinogenic potential and the 
degree of hazard in the proposed circumstances of use. 
After an evaluation, which should employ the full 
scientific and technological potential available, the 
measures developed in the two preceding paragraphs 
should apply. Also, procedures developed in paragraph 
4.3 have special importance in this connection. 
3.4. If safer substitutes are available, they should be 
used. Research for safer substitutes and information on 
their availability should be intensified and improved. 
The Member States which have not yet ratified ILO 
Convention 139 on 'Prevention and Control of Occu­
pational Hazards caused by Carcinogenic Substances 
and Agents' should do so. 
3.5. Another contribution to risk prevention can be 
made by the setting of limit values for exposure and 
gradually tightening them up. Nevertheless, it should be 
made explicit that, with a view to prevention, the only 
known safe level to offer a zero risk is zero exposure. 
3.6. Factors deserving special attention in this respect 
are: 
— the development of measuring methods for the 
working environment and for health surveillance; 
improvement of sensitivity and specificity of tests 
forms part of this development, 
29. 7. 85 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 188/3 
— monitoring per worker, workplace and work area, 
— measurement with a periodicity defined according 
to the characteristics of the production process, 
preferably at least every three months, or less 
frequently as a result of consultations between 
employers and workers and their representatives if 
concentration levels are so reduced as to legitimize 
the assumption that the risk for those exposed is 
significantly limited, 
— consultation of workers and their representatives on 
measurements and their results, 
— right of workers and their representatives to request 
measurements, and finally, 
— provision of information on the contents of existing 
relevant national legislation. 
3.7. An important field for developing risk limitation 
measures is that of technical measures. 
3.7.1. In this connection, first, measures should be 
taken regarding transport of carcinogenic agents (e.g. in 
closed containers or in appropriate form). 
3.7.2. Secondly, attention should be paid to 'intra-
system' technical measures which influence process 
factors, e.g. activities at the workplace such as: 
— the reduction of concentration of carcinogens, 
respectively the degree of exposure, 
— prevention of emission, e.g. by the use of closed 
systems, 
— reduction of temperature and of pressure, 
— change of the layout of the workplace and work 
area, 
— change of process parameters, e.g. by the use of 
catalysts, 
— change from batch to continuous processes, 
— filtering in case of recirculation of air. 
3.7.3. Thirdly, options regarding 'extra-systems' tech­
nical measures should be elaborated, (e.g. disposal of 
emissions by means of aspirators or ventilation; pre­
vention of exposure by the use of protective devices). 
3.7.4. Fourthly, the reduction of individual risk to 
workers in each of these stages has to be considered. 
Preventive measures should concern: 
— reduction of duration and intensity of work during 
exposure, 
— reduction of the number of workers exposed (not so 
as to increase the individual risk of those exposed), — use of protective equipment (respiratory devices, 
clothing, etc.), 
— workers exposed to carcinogenic agents/processes 
should be subject to regular medical and biological 
surveillance. 
3.8. With regard to prevention, it should be noted that 
there is a need to identify whether there are greater risk 
groups. An expert group should study this in order to 
determine whether extra measures will be necessary. 
The Committee also recognized problems which may 
arise in this connection, e.g. with a view to existing 
regulations for equal treatment and equal opportunity 
for men and women. 
4. Consultation, information collection and 
dissemination 
4.1. One of the greatest impediments to prevention is 
the lack of knowledge of the carcinogenic potential of 
agents/processes at the workplace, of the dangers 
involved, and of the possibilities of effective prevention 
and their application among employers and workers. A 
further difficulty is that the effects of carcinogenic 
substances tend to manifest themselves years after 
exposure. This might lead to failure to adopt preventive 
measures, because acute effects cannot be seen. 
4.2. A system is urgently needed which would permit 
a better flow of relevant information to those respon­
sible for protective measures at the workplace, and 
through them to workers and their representatives. 
Similar information should be made available to other 
relevant groups, such as occupational physicians, envi­
ronmental hygienists and those responsible for research 
to fill lacunae in knowledge. It is desirable to link up 
certain risk prevention measures with the creation of 
conditions for a better flow of information (establish­
ment of data banks, registration, see heading 5 below). 
4.3. Regular consultations and cooperation between 
employers and workers can and must fulfil an impor­
tant role as a means of planning risk limitation and 
operating rules. 
4.4. A condition for effective consultation is that of 
adequate information both to employers and workers. 
4.5. As far as employers, workers and self-employed 
are concerned it should be stressed that many of the 
measures recommended in the preceding heading on 
risk limitations could and should be used as vehicles for 
better information. 
4.6. Workers should receive full information in order 
to be able really to cooperate in risk prevention. On the 
No C 188/4 Official Journal of the European Communities 29. 7. 85 
other hand, attention has been paid to problems of 
business confidentiality and to the desirability of giving 
the appropriate information to the appropriate people: 
workers may need different information from that 
needed by occupational physicians. 
4.7. Improvement with regard to information to 
workers could be developed in the form in which it is 
being provided. It should be given orally as well as 
visually and in writing, be comprehensible, dissemi­
nated regularly (e.g. once a year), in the mother tongue 
of the workers and specific to their job. 
4.8. Information should, as far as substance is 
concerned, deal with risks and effects of working with 
carcinogens, the concentration of carcinogenic agents 
to be expected during activities at the workplace, and 
preventive measures to be taken. The latter element 
should, in particular, take the form of detailed working 
rules and training, concerning both work under 
'normal circumstances' (personal hygiene measures, 
cleaning, disposal of waste) and under 'abnormal 
circumstances' or including emergencies. It should 
cover activities such as repair and maintenance, and 
finally labelling. Labels should inform those at the 
workplace of the name of the substance they have to 
work with, the carcinogenic properties and potency, the 
concentration of agents in them, the preventive meas­
ures to be taken, and the possible effects. This kind of 
workplace oriented labelling will be a necessary 
complement to existing Community legislation 
concerning labelling of dangerous substances. 
4.9. The measures mentioned should not only apply to 
industrial workers, but also to agricultural workers, or 
other workers and self-employed who are exposed to 
carcinogenic agents/processes at the workplace. 
4.10. Existing lists of occupations involving carcino­
genic risks, drawn up by specialized international agen­
cies, should be constantly updated. 
4.11. Special attention should be paid to effective 
dissemination of information to, and consultation in, 
medium-sized and small enterprises. 
5. Registration of medical data 
5.1. An energetic effort should be made to improve 
registration of the results of medical and biological 
examination of workers exposed to carcinogens, with a 
view to creating better conditions for medical and 
epidemiological research. The same holds for the 
setting-up of death registers including information on the cause of death and previous occupational activities 
of the deceased; and also for the provision of cancer 
register information combined with occupation data, 
and any other relevant data collection. Better access 
and use of existing data should be secured. Develop­
ment of an effective record linkage scheme connecting 
these areas should be given priority. Great importance 
should also be attached in this connection to an 
updated job classification scheme. 
5.2. As regards the possible conflict between scientific 
and ethical values in these registration improvements, it 
should be possible to draw up a system of registration 
which can respect the confidentiality of personal data. 
For instance, statistics containing personal data could 
be 'cleaned' by persons who, with a view to their 
professional ethics, can be* expected and trusted to 
guarantee this confidentiality. 
5.3. Apart from ethical questions, registration of cases 
of (occupational) cancer raises several technical 
problems which should be taken into account. Some are 
linked with the long latent period of the disease. Others 
have to do with the mobility of workers exposed to 
carcinogenic agents/processes across boundaries, and 
the change of jobs. For the sake of completeness of 
data, tracing of workers previously exposed might be 
needed after cessation of employment. 
5.4. Registration of occupational cancers should not 
be restricted to mortal cancers, but also include occupa­
tional cancers which may be treated successfully. 
5.5. The registers as meant above should be kept for a 
minimum length of time of 40 years, as from the date of 
cessation of exposure to carcinogenic agents/processes 
at the workplace. 
6. Action by the European Community 
6.1. The special nature of carcinogenic agents/ 
processes and the special character of the risks they 
imply justify the preparation of a special Directive 
under the framework Directive, dealing notably with 
the use of carcinogens at the workplace, under which 
each relevant substance could be treated individually. 
6.2. Furthermore, the European Community should 
draw the attention of those Member States which have 
not yet ratified existing relevant international instru­
ments to the desirability of doing so. 
29. 7. 85 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 188/5 
6.3. Research in fields relevant to the prevention of 
occupational cancer should actively be taken up and coordinated by the European Community, and should 
be listed as a priority in the EC's action programme. 
Done at Brussels, 29 May 1985. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Gerd MUHR 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EEC) No 3626/82 on 
the implementation in the Community of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered 
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (*) 
(85/C 188/02) 
On 18 April 1985 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, acting 
under the optional consultation clause of the Treaty establishing the European Economic 
Community, on the abovementioned proposal. 
The Section for Protection of the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Affairs, which 
was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 
14 May 1985, in the light of the report by Mr Storie-Pugh. 
At its 227th plenary session (meeting of 29 May 1985) the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following opinion by a unanimous vote: 
The Committee approves the proposal of the Commission. 
Done at Brussels, 29 May 1985. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Gerd MUHR 
(') OJNoC 112, 7. 5. 1985, p. 7.