GHS Classification Result

日本語で表示



GENERAL INFORMATION
Item Information
CAS RN 121-33-5
Chemical Name Vanillin
Substance ID 24A6019
Classification year (FY) FY2012
Ministry who conducted the classification Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW)/Ministry of the Environment (MOE)
New/Revised New
Classification result in other fiscal year  
Download of Excel format Excel file

REFERENCE INFORMATION
Item Information
Guidance used for the classification (External link) Physical Hazards and Health Hazards: GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government (July, 2010) Environmental Hazards: UN GHS Document (4th revised edition)
UN GHS document (External link) UN GHS document
Definitions/Abbreviations (Excel file) Definitions/Abbreviations
Model Label by MHLW (External link) MHLW Website (in Japanese Only)
Model SDS by MHLW (External link) MHLW Website (in Japanese Only)
OECD/eChemPortal (External link) eChemPortal

PHYSICAL HAZARDS
Hazard class Classification Pictogram
Signal word
Hazard statement
(code)
Precautionary statement
(code)
Rationale for the classification
1 Explosives Not applicable
-
-
- - There are no chemical groups associated with explosive properties present in the molecule.
2 Flammable gases (including chemically unstable gases) Not applicable
-
-
- - Solid (GHS definition)
3 Aerosols Not applicable
-
-
- - Not aerosol products.
4 Oxidizing gases Not applicable
-
-
- - Solid (GHS definition)
5 Gases under pressure Not applicable
-
-
- - Solid (GHS definition)
6 Flammable liquids Not applicable
-
-
- - Solid (GHS definition)
7 Flammable solids Classification not possible
-
-
- - No data available.
8 Self-reactive substances and mixtures Not applicable
-
-
- - There are no chemical groups present in the molecule associated with explosive or self-reactive properties.
9 Pyrophoric liquids Not applicable
-
-
- - Solid (GHS definition)
10 Pyrophoric solids Not classified
-
-
- - It is estimated that it does not ignite at normal temperatures from an autoignition temperature of > 400 deg C (ICSC (2009)).
11 Self-heating substances and mixtures Classification not possible
-
-
- - Test methods applicable to solid (melting point <= 140 deg C) substances are not available.
12 Substances and mixtures which, in contact with water, emit flammable gases Not applicable
-
-
- - The chemical structure of the substance does not contain metals or metalloids (B, Si, P, Ge, As, Se, Sn, Sb, Te, Bi, Po, At).
13 Oxidizing liquids Not applicable
-
-
- - Solid (GHS definition)
14 Oxidizing solids Not applicable
-
-
- - The substance is an organic compound containing oxygen (but not fluorine or chlorine) which is chemically bonded only to carbon or hydrogen.
15 Organic peroxides Not applicable
-
-
- - Organic compounds containing no bivalent -O-O- structure.
16 Corrosive to metals Classification not possible
-
-
- - Test methods applicable to solid substances are not available.

HEALTH HAZARDS
Hazard class Classification Pictogram
Signal word
Hazard statement
(code)
Precautionary statement
(code)
Rationale for the classification
1 Acute toxicity (Oral) Not classified
-
-
- - There are multiple LD50 values for rats, and based on the data (3,978 mg/kg and 4,200 mg/kg) (SIDS (1996)) from the two tests that were performed according to the former guideline internationally approved (OECD TG 401), it was classified as "Not classified" in the Classification JIS (Category 5 in UN GHS classification).
1 Acute toxicity (Dermal) Not classified
-
-
- - It was classified as "Not classified" because the administration of 2,000 mg/kg to rats caused no death, and an LD50 value was >= 2,000 mg/kg (OECD TG 402, GLP) (SIDS (1996)).
1 Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Gases) Not applicable
-
-
- - Solid (GHS definition)
1 Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Vapours) Classification not possible
-
-
- - Because it is reported that 2-hour exposure to 41.7 mg/m3 (the saturated vapour pressure concentration) (converted 4-hour equivalent value: 0.021 mg/L) caused no death in rats (IUCLID (2000)), an LC50 value was estimated to be 0.021 mg/L/4 hours or above, but the category cannot be determined. Therefore, the classification is not possible.
1 Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Dusts and mists) Classification not possible
-
-
- - No data available.
2 Skin corrosion/irritation Not classified
-
-
- - It was classified as "Not classified" because there was no irritation in a skin irritation test in which this substance moistened with water was applied to six rabbits for 24 hours (SIDS (1996)). And also in humans, it is reported that in an occlusive application test in which undiluted this substance was applied to 30 workers including ones with dermatitis and 15 healthy controls, no irritation was observed, and it was assessed to be negative (SIDS (1996)).
3 Serious eye damage/eye irritation Category 2B
-
Warning
H320 P305+P351+P338
P337+P313
P264
In an eye irritation test in which 55 mg of this substance was applied to six rabbits, the irritation score (equivalent to AOI) was 18.8 (maximum 110), and it was slightly irritating. Symptoms gradually improved from 48 to 120 hours, all scored zero after seven days (SIDS (1996)), and the animals fully recovered. Therefore, it was classified in Category 2B.
4 Respiratory sensitization Classification not possible
-
-
- - No data available.
4 Skin sensitization Classification not possible
-
-
- - It was not sensitizing in skin sensitization tests with guinea pigs: a maximization test (OECD 406; GLP) and a Buehler test, which gave negative results (SIDS (1996)), but other tests by a maximization test were positive (SIDS (1996)), indicating that this substance is sensitizing or has an allergenic potential. On the other hand, as for humans, no sensitization reactions were shown in a maximization test in 25 subjects, and the negative result in humans supports the opinion that this substance is not a sensitizer (SIDS (1996)). From the above, multiple test data were shown in animals and humans, but because the results were contradicting, and no conclusion was drawn, it was classified as "Classification not possible."
5 Germ cell mutagenicity Not classified
-
-
- - It was classified as "Not classified" based on negative results in micronucleus tests with bone marrow cells after oral or intraperitoneal administration to mice (in vivo somatic cell mutagenicity test) (SIDS (1996), NTP DB (Access on May 2012)). Besides, as for in vitro tests, it was negative in an Ames test (OECD TG471) (NTP DB (1982), SIDS (1996)), and negative in a chromosomal aberration test with CHO cells (OECD TG473) (SIDS (1996)).
6 Carcinogenicity Classification not possible
-
-
- - It is reported that no carcinogenicity was observed in a 2-year diet administration test with rats (SIDS (1996)), but there are no other important data. Therefore, it was classified as "Classification not possible" due to lack of data.
7 Reproductive toxicity Classification not possible
-
-
- - It is reported that in a test in which female rats were orally dosed from 7 days before mating throughout mating, gestation, and parturition period until day 4 after parturition, reduced weight gain and decreased food consumption were observed in maternal animals, but no effects were seen in offspring (JECFA 1021 (2002)). However, because the details are unknown, it was classified as "Classification not possible" lack of data.
8 Specific target organ toxicity - Single exposure Classification not possible
-
-
- - In three acute oral toxicity tests with rats, there is a report on congested lung in the first test (2,000-3,980 mg/kg; LD50 = 3,978 mg/kg), hyperemia of the lung and liver and gastrointestinal inflammation in the second test (2,510-3,960 mg/kg; LD50 = 3,300 mg/kg), and hemorrhagic lung, gastrointestinal irritation, congested kidney and adrenal gland in the third test (2,150-10,000 mg/kg; LD50 = 3,830 mg/kg) (SIDS (1996)), but all were findings in the dead animals, seen at doses above the upper limit of the guidance values. And in a test by dermal administration of 2,000 mg/kg to rats, no deaths, clinical signs, or anomalies at necropsy were observed (SIDS (1996)). From the above, it was thought to correspond to "Not classified" in the oral and dermal routes because there were no findings except for death cases in oral administration tests, in which doses were set to be equal to or higher than the upper limit of the guidance value range, and no abnormalities were found after dermal administration at the dose of the upper limit of the guidance value range. However, because there are no data and effects are unknown in the inhalation route, it was classified as "Classification not possible" for specific target organ toxicity (single exposure).
9 Specific target organ toxicity - Repeated exposure Classification not possible
-
-
- - NOEL in repeated oral administration tests with rats is reported to be 3,000 ppm (150 mg/kg/day) or above in a 91-day diet administration test, 10,000 ppm (500 mg/kg/day) or above in a 16-week diet administration test, 10,000 ppm (500 mg/kg/day) or above in a 26-week diet administration test, 50,000 ppm (2,500 mg/kg/day) or above in a 1-year diet administration test, and 20,000 ppm (1,000 mg/kg/day) or above in a 2-year diet administration test (SIDS (1996)), and it exceeded the upper limit of the guidance value range in multiple tests. Furthermore, in a test in which dogs were given capsules for 26 weeks, no adverse effects including those in histopathological examinations were reported at 100 mg/kg/day corresponding to the upper limit of the guidance value range (SIDS (1996)). From the above results, it corresponds to "Not classified" in the oral route. However, because there are no data or data are lacking in the other routes, it was classified as "Classification not possible" for specific target organ toxicity (repeated exposure). Besides, it is reported that 4-month inhalation exposure in rats affected the nervous system, cardiovascular system, etc. (USEPA/HPV (2001)), but the details on test conditions such as exposure time and test results are unknown.
10 Aspiration hazard Classification not possible
-
-
- - No data available.

ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS
Hazard class Classification Pictogram
Signal word
Hazard statement
(code)
Precautionary statement
(code)
Rationale for the classification
11 Hazardous to the aquatic environment (Acute) Category 3
-
-
H402 P273
P501
It was classified in Category 3 from 96-hour LC50 = 57 mg/L for fish (Pimephales promelas) (SIDS, 2002).
11 Hazardous to the aquatic environment (Long-term) Not classified
-
-
- - If chronic toxicity data are used, then it is classified as "Not classified" due to rapid degradability (a degradation rate by BOD: 97% (Biodegradation and Bioconcentration Results of Existing Chemical Substances under the Chemical Substances Control Law, 1993)), and 21-day NOEC = 5.9 mg/L for crustacea (Daphnia magna) (SIDS, 2002).
If acute toxicity data are used for a trophic level for which chronic toxicity data are not obtained, then it is classified as "Not classified" due to rapid degradability (a degradation rate by BOD: 96.7% (Biodegradation and Bioconcentration Results of Existing Chemical Substances under the Chemical Substances Control Law, 2003)), and a low bioaccumulation estimate (LogKow = 1.21 (PHYSPROP Database (2009))), although it corresponds to "Not classified" in acute toxicity for fish (SIDS, 2002).
From the above results, it was classified as "Not classified."
12 Hazardous to the ozone layer Classification not possible
-
-
- - This substance is not listed in the Annexes to the Montreal Protocol.


NOTE:
  • GHS Classification Result by the Japanese Government is intended to provide a reference for preparing a GHS label or SDS for users. To include the same classification result in a label or SDS for Japan is NOT mandatory.
  • Users can cite or copy this classification result when preparing a GHS label or SDS. Please be aware, however, that the responsibility for a label or SDS prepared by citing or copying this classification result lies with users.
  • This GHS classification was conducted based on the information sources and the guidance for classification and judgement which are described in the GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government etc. Using other literature, test results etc. as evidence and including different content from this classification result in a label or SDS are allowed.
  • Hazard statement and precautionary statement will show by hovering the mouse cursor over a code in the column of "Hazard statement" and "Precautionary statement," respectively. In the excel file, both the codes and statements are provided.
  • A blank or "-" in the column of "Classification" denotes that a classification for the hazard class was not conducted in the year.

To GHS Information