Human exposure modelling for chemical risk assessment: a review of current approaches and research and policy implications

Fryer, Michael E.; Collins, Chris; Ferrier, Helen; Colvile, R. N.; Nieuwenhuijsen, Mark

doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2005.11.011

Cited by 208 publications

(102 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Health risk assessment of exposure to chemical and toxic materials is to determine the level of risk, will also enable us to make the right decisions for the measures needed to protect people (Manpower 2005). Nowadays, a wide range of models for health risk assessment was used (Fryer, Collins et al, 2006 provide conditions when making decisions, particularly in relation to the control and optimization of working conditions can prioritize risks and directed a development costs that are often limited, in most important risks in the field of control (Swaen and Meijers 1989). At the moment, information of estimates of health risks and the human environment for the more than 10,000 existing chemical composition, is incomplete.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Semi-Quantitative Health Risks of Exposure to Harmful Chemical Agents in the Context of Carcinogenesis in the Latex Glove Manufacturing Industry

Yari

Asadi²,

Varmazyar³

2016

Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Semi-Quantitative Health Risks of Exposure to Harmful Chemical Agents in the Context of Carcinogenesis in the Latex Glove Manufacturing Industry

Yari

Asadi²,

Varmazyar³

2016

Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This does not mean to say that the end result will be any less rigorous or less useful; only time and experience will allow such a judgement to be made. It is clear that if considerations of exposure are to play a far greater role under REACH than has been the case under previous EU chemicals legislation, then the practical implications arising from their implementation and communication need to be well understood and elucidated (Fryer et al, 2006). But it is also apparent that they do not appear to have been given equivalence (at least in the conceptual thinking of REACH) to those relating to hazard and effect assessments.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scientific governance and the process for exposure scenario development in REACH

Money¹,

Hemmen

Vermeire³

2007

J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The primary process established by the European Commission to address the science needed to define key REACH concepts and to help rationally implement REACH's ambitions is enshrined in a series of activities known as the REACH Implementation Projects (RIPs). These are projects that aim to define the methodology that could be used, and present the basis for guidance on the actual principles and procedures that may be (are proposed to be) followed in the development of the required documentation that ensures the safe use of chemicals. In order to develop soundly based and equitable regulation, it is necessary that science governance using established and accepted scientific principles must take a leading role. The extent to which such governance is embraced will be determined by many factors, but notably the process adopted to enable scientific discussion to take place. This article addresses the issues of science as they have impacted on the exemplification of the Exposure Scenario concept under REACH. The current RIP activities have created a non-adversarial process in which the key stakeholders are able to discuss the key REACH challenges. But the RIP activities will be finalised before REACH comes into force. A suitable mechanism should perhaps now be identified to ensure that this positive spirit of scientific discussion and collaboration can continue to benefit REACH and those that it serves well into the future.

show abstract

“…An important aspect of human health protection is prevention, assessment and reduction of risks caused by these substances (WHO, 2000). Exposure assessment is a crucial stage in chemical risk assessment and consists of quantifying the level of chemicals to which humans are exposed, in terms of magnitude, duration and frequency (RATSC, 1999;Fryer et al, 2006). Because it is not always possible to measure exposure directly, mathematical models are often used to estimate the exposure.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Separation of uncertainty and interindividual variability in human exposure modeling

Ragas

Brouwer

Büchner

et al. 2008

J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The NORMTOX model predicts the lifetime-averaged exposure to contaminants through multiple environmental media, that is, food, air, soil, drinking and surface water. The model was developed to test the coherence of Dutch environmental quality objectives (EQOs). A set of EQOs is called coherent if simultaneous exposure to different environmental media that are all polluted up to their respective EQOs does not result in exceeding the acceptable or tolerable daily intake (ADI or TDI). Aim of the present study is to separate the impact of uncertainty and interindividual variability in coherence predictions with the NORMTOX model. The method is illustrated in a case study for chlorfenvinphos, mercury and nitrate. First, ANOVA was used to calculate interindividual variability in input parameters. Second, nested Monte Carlo simulation was used to propagate uncertainty and interindividual variability separately. Lifetime-averaged exposure to chlorfenvinphos, mercury and nitrate was modeled for the Dutch population. Output distributions specified the population fraction at risk, due to a particular exposure, and the reliability of this risk. From the case study, it was obtained that at lifelong exposure to all media polluted up to their standard, 100% of the Dutch population exceeds the ADI for chlorfenvinphos, 15% for mercury and 0% for nitrate. Variance in exposure to chlorfenvinphos, mercury and nitrate is mostly caused by interindividual variability instead of true uncertainty. It is concluded that the likelihood that ADIs of chlorfenvinphos and mercury will be exceeded should be further explored. If exceeding is likely, decision makers should focus on identification of high-risk subpopulations, rather than on additional research to obtain more accurate estimates for particular parameters.

show abstract

Human exposure modelling for chemical risk assessment: a review of current approaches and research and policy implications

Cited by 208 publications

References 9 publications

Assessment of Semi-Quantitative Health Risks of Exposure to Harmful Chemical Agents in the Context of Carcinogenesis in the Latex Glove Manufacturing Industry

Assessment of Semi-Quantitative Health Risks of Exposure to Harmful Chemical Agents in the Context of Carcinogenesis in the Latex Glove Manufacturing Industry

Scientific governance and the process for exposure scenario development in REACH

Separation of uncertainty and interindividual variability in human exposure modeling

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About