Which option best describes when biological monitoring is appropriate?

• A. Hazard assessment, presence of biomarkers, exposure potential, and regulatory relevance
• B. Hazard assessment only
• C. Biomarkers only
• D. Regulatory relevance only

Answer: (C)

Biological monitoring is appropriate when there is a measurable biomarker of exposure that you can detect in a biological specimen. In practice, you need a validated biomarker that reflects the absorbed dose from work exposure, so the monitoring results will meaningfully indicate whether an worker has taken in the chemical and to what extent.

If there’s no established biomarker to measure, or the biomarker isn’t validated or specific, biological monitoring cannot provide reliable information about internal exposure, even if hazards exist or exposure potential seems high. Hazard assessment, exposure potential, and regulatory relevance are important parts of safety planning, but they don’t by themselves justify biomonitoring without a usable biomarker.

For example, measuring a specific metabolite in urine or a chemical in blood can quantify internal dose for solvents or metals, whereas without such a biomarker, the monitoring would not yield actionable exposure information.