Forty years ago, Rachel Carson (1962) wrote in Silent Spring: ‘If we are going to live so intimately with these chemicals—eating and drinking them, taking them into the very marrow of our bones—we had better know something about their nature and their power.’ She could surely not have imagined that her observation: ‘The full scope of the dangerous interaction of chemicals is as yet little known . . .’ would still be so accurate in the third millennium. In 2003 the European Commission published a draft regulation known as REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Administration of Chemicals). This will amend or replace most of the existing European Union (EU) legislation on supply of chemicals, introducing a common approach for existing substances and for substances new to the market, and shifting much of the responsibility for evaluation of hazard from the member states to industry (Musu, 2005). The traditional core area of interest of the occupational hygienist concerned with chemicals is their use in the workplace, andmost legislation on this is not affected. Nevertheless, REACH is likely to have a big effect on the hygienist’s work, and a recent workshop organized jointly by BOHS and the Belgian Society for Occupational Hygiene considered this. The EU Council and Parliament may agree to the new legislation in 2006, and it may then come into force in 2007. Various studies have tried to estimate the negative and positive effects of the draft regulation. The European Commission Extended Impact Assessment estimated the costs to be between d2.8 and d5.2 billion (European Commission, 2003). The health benefits were estimated to be worth between d27 and d54 billion over a 30 year period (RPA, 2003). By these estimates, therefore, the benefits dwarf the costs. However, more than 99% of the calculated benefits were owing to avoided cancer deaths. The modest health benefits estimated for non-cancer diseases seem to be flawed, as the estimated costs are a small fraction of actual costs borne by insurers for these occupational diseases. Figures available for Germany on occupational skin diseases and on occupational asthma show a total expenditure of approximately d240 million in 2001. In contrast, the figures employed in the RPA study for Germany, for the same year and for the same two disease categories, estimated costs to be only about one-hundredth of this figure, about d2.5 million. We can estimate the true costs from the occupational diseases documentation compiled by the industrial employers’ liability insurance associations in Germany, the Gewerbliche Berufsgenossenschaften (BGs). This documentation forms an acceptable basis for an appropriate assessment of the costs of chemical-related occupational diseases, which occur, above all, when lack of knowledge of substance properties prevents adequate protection or when the knowledge exists but the information passed on by manufacturers or users is inadequate. In the following, the basis of the occupational diseases documentation will be explained. Using this, the potential effects of REACH are estimated for occupational skin diseases and occupational asthma, utilizing the same approach as employed in the RPA study (RPA, 2003). Details of the cost estimates are given in supplementary information in the on-line edition of this issue (Ruhl and Wriedt, 2006).