NITE - Chemical Management Field

GHS Classification Result

GENERAL INFORMATION

Item	Information
CAS RN	74-88-4
Chemical Name	Methyl iodine
Substance ID	H26-B-132, -
Classification year (FY)	FY2014
Ministry who conducted the classification	Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW)/Ministry of the Environment (MOE)
New/Revised	Revised
Classification result in other fiscal year	FY2009 FY2006
Download of Excel format	Excel file

REFERENCE INFORMATION

Item	Information
Guidance used for the classification (External link)	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 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	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)
3	Aerosols	Not applicable	- -	-	-	Not aerosol products.
4	Oxidizing gases	Not applicable	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)
5	Gases under pressure	Not applicable	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)
6	Flammable liquids	Not classified	- -	-	-	It is not combustible (ICSC (2012)).
7	Flammable solids	Not applicable	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)
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 classified	- -	-	-	It is not combustible (ICSC (2012)).
10	Pyrophoric solids	Not applicable	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)
11	Self-heating substances and mixtures	Not classified	- -	-	-	It is not combustible (ICSC (2012)).
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	- -	-	-	Organic compounds containing no oxygen, fluorine or chlorine
14	Oxidizing solids	Not applicable	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)
15	Organic peroxides	Not applicable	- -	-	-	Organic compounds containing no bivalent -O-O- structure in the molecule
16	Corrosive to metals	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Test methods applicable to low-temperature-boiling liquids 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)	Category 3	Danger	H301	P301+P310 P361+P364 P264 P270 P321 P330 P405 P501	Based on reports of LD50 values of 76 mg/kg (DFGOT vol. 7 (1996), IARC 41 (1986)) and 150-200 mg/kg (PATTY (6th, 2012)) for rats, it was classified in Category 3.
1	Acute toxicity (Dermal)	Not classified	- -	-	-	Based on an LD50 value of >2,000 mg/kg (male, female) for rabbits (A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2012), Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011)), it was classified as "Not classified."
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Gases)	Not applicable	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Vapours)	Category 2	Danger	H330	P304+P340 P403+P233 P260 P271 P284 P310 P320 P405 P501	Based on an LC50 (4 hours) value of 232 ppm for rats (ACGIH (7th, 2001), DFGOT vol. 7 (1996)), it was classified in Category 2. Besides, the reference value in units of ppm was applied as a vapor without a mist because the LC50 value was lower than 90% of the saturated vapor concentration (532,895 ppm).
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Dusts and mists)	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification not possible due to lack of data.
2	Skin corrosion/irritation	Category 2	Warning	H315	P302+P352 P332+P313 P362+P364 P264 P280 P321	There is a description that in a skin irritation test in which 0.5 mL of this substance was semi-occlusively applied to rabbits for 4 hours, the primary irritation index was 4.88, and it was moderately irritating (A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2012)). In addition, there is a report that erythema with vesicles was observed after 19 hours when 1 mL of this substance was applied to the skins of humans for 30 minutes (IARC 15 (1977)). From the above results, it was classified in Category 2. Besides, this substance was classified as "Xi; R38'' in the EU DSD classification and as "skin Irrit. 2 H315'' in the EU CLP classification.
3	Serious eye damage/eye irritation	Category 2A	Warning	H319	P305+P351+P338 P337+P313 P264 P280	This substance was classified in Category 2A because it is described that very severe eye irritation was observed (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011)). It was classified based on the description of Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011) because public information about data in the previous classification was not available.
4	Respiratory sensitization	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification not possible due to lack of data.
4	Skin sensitization	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification not possible due to lack of data. Besides, there is a report that no sensitization was observed in a skin sensitization test with guinea pigs (maximization method) (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011)), however, it was considered to be an insufficient data for use in classification because details of the test conditions and the results were unknown.
5	Germ cell mutagenicity	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	It was classified as "Classification not possible" because it was not possible to classify a substance as "Not classified" according to the revised GHS classification guidance for the Japanese government. As for in vivo, it was negative in a mouse bone marrow micronucleus test (A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2012)) and positive in a DNA binding test with rats (liver, lung, stomach, forestomach) (A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2012)). As for in vitro, there was a negative or positive result in a bacterial reverse mutation test and a mammalian cell gene mutation test (A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2012), ACGIH (7th, 2001), PATTY (6th, 2012), DFGOT vol. 7 (1996), IARC 71 (1999)), and it was positive in a chromosomal aberration test with cultured mammalian cells (A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2012)).
6	Carcinogenicity	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	It was classified as "Classification not possible" because it was classified in Group 3 by IARC (IARC 71 (1999)). This IARC evaluation was not changed in the" IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans, 2010" (HSDB (Access on September 2014)). NTP describes that this substance has not yet been evaluated for carcinogenicity (NTP Nomination Summary (2006)).
7	Reproductive toxicity	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	In a two-generation reproductive study with rats by the inhalation route, no effects on fertility or pups were observed even at doses where parental toxicity (decreased body weight gain, decreased adrenal weight, degeneration of the olfactory epithelium, etc.) was observed (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011)), and in a teratogenicity study with rats by the inhalation route, fetotoxicity including teratogenicity was not observed in the fetuses at a dose where maternal toxicity (decreased body weight gain, decreased food consumption) was observed (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011)). It is described that in a teratogenicity study with rabbits by the inhalation route (inhalation exposure on gestational days 6-28), decreased maternal body weight gain and the reduced number of surviving fetuses with increased post implantation loss were observed, however, no effects on fertility or no teratogenicity was seen (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011)). Therefore, it was classified as "Classification not possible."
8	Specific target organ toxicity - Single exposure	Category 1 (central nervous system), Category 3 (respiratory tract irritation, narcotic effects)	Danger Warning	H370 H335 H336	P308+P311 P260 P264 P270 P321 P405 P501 P304+P340 P403+P233 P261 P271 P312	This substance is respiratory tract irritating (ATSDR (2004)). In humans, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, oliguria, lethargy, drowsiness, dizziness, unsteadiness during walking, ataxia, inability to carry out antagonistic movements in rapid succession (adiadochokinesia), unclear speech, visual disorders (such as double vision), delirium, severe and prolonged central nervous system injury, tremors, coma, etc. were reported in cases of poisoning in workers by inhalation (ACGIH (7th, 2001), DFGOT vol. 7 (1996), PATTY (6th, 2012)). In experimental animals, rats and mice showed narcosis (DFGOT vol. 7 (1996)), and decreased locomotor activity, sitting position with dropped head, ptosis, an increase in repetitive movements of the mouth and jaw, hunched position, gait disturbance and apathy for startle response, etc. in rats by inhalation at 25-400 ppm (0.15-2.32 mg/L) were observed as mainly high-dose symptoms. By the oral administration of 100-250 mg/kg to mice, piloerection, prostration, hypothermia, hypoactivity, abnormal breathing, hunched posture, unsteady gait, mydriasis and eyelid closure were observed (A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2012), Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011)). These findings in experimental animals were found within the range of doses corresponding to Category 1. In addition, there is a description that narcosis developed in rats and mice (DFGOT vol. 7 (1996)). From the above, it was considered that this substance may have an effect on the central nervous system as well as respiratory tract irritation and narcotic effects, therefore, it was classified in Category 1 (central nervous system), Category 3 (respiratory tract irritation, narcotic effects).
9	Specific target organ toxicity - Repeated exposure	Category 1 (central nervous system), Category 2 (respiratory organs, thyroid)	Danger Warning	H372 H373	P260 P264 P270 P314 P501	There is a description that a worker exposed at a manufacturing plant of this substance developed neurological symptoms such as vertigo, visual disturbances and weakness initially, followed by psychological disturbances and intellectual impairment (IARC 41 (1986)). In addition, there is a description that in workers or chemists who were repeatedly exposed by inhalation to the vapor of this substance, central and peripheral nervous system disorders such as lethargy, dizziness, nausea, unsteadiness during walking, adiadochokinesia, unclear speech, visual disorders were observed, and in cases with progressed symptoms, confusion, delirium and semi-comatose states were observed (DFGOT vol. 7 (1996)). As for experimental animals, in studies with rats exposed by inhalation to the vapor of this substance for 90 days or 1 year, degeneration of the olfactory epithelium in the nasal cavity was observed at concentrations of 70 ppm (0.41 mg/L/6 hours: corresponding to Category 2) and 60 ppm (0.36 mg/L/6 hours: corresponding to Category 2), respectively. In addition, by the 1-year exposure, effects on the thyroid (increased weight, cytoplasmic vacuolation and hyperplasia of the follicular epithelial cells) were seen at 60 ppm (0.35 mg/L/6 hours, corresponding to Category 2) (A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2012)). By the oral route, in a 90-day or 18-month feeding study with mice, and in a 12-month gavage (capsule) study with dogs, effects on the thyroid (findings similar to those observed in rats exposed by inhalation) were also observed within the dose range (equivalent to 8.0-26.8 mg/kg/day) corresponding to Category 1 or 2 (A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2012)). From the above, by considering neurological disorders in humans and effects on experimental animals, it was classified in Category 1 (central nervous system), Category 2 (respiratory organs, thyroid).
10	Aspiration hazard	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification not possible due to lack of data.

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)	-	- -	-	-	-
11	Hazardous to the aquatic environment (Long-term)	-	- -	-	-	-
12	Hazardous to the ozone layer	-	- -	-	-	-

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