Assessment factors various approaches

Historically, the so-called safety factor approach was introduced in the United States in the mid-1950s in response to the legislative needs in the area of the safety of chemical food additives (Lehman and Fitzhugh 1954). This approach proposed that a safe level of chemical food additives could be derived from a chronic NOAEL from animal studies divided by a 100-fold safety factor. The 100-fold safety factor as proposed by Lehman and Fitzhugh was based on a limited analysis of subchronic/chronic data on fluorine and arsenic in rats, dogs, and humans, and also on the assumption that the human population as a whole is heterogeneous. Initially, Lehman and Fitzhugh reasoned that the safety factor of 100 accounted for several areas of uncertainty  

In 1961, the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) and the Joint Meeting of Experts on Pesticides Residues (JMPR) adopted this approach in a slightly modified form The safe level was called the Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) and expressed in mg/kg body weight per day (Vermeire et al. 1999, ECETOC 2003). Usually, a safety factor of 100 is used by JECFA and JMPR for establishing ADIs by this ADI approach however, the procedures adopted by JECFA and JMPR do not generate a clear justification for deviation from the factor of 100, but in some individual cases, an expert explanation is given for the use of factors other than 100 (Vermeire et al. 1999). 

It is apparent that the factor of 100 has no quantitative bases, and the choice of the value 100 is more or less arbitrary (Vermeire et al. 1999). Retrospectively, some attempts have been made to support a 100-fold factor (Bigwood 1973, Lu 1979, Vettorazzi 1977 as reviewed in Vermeire et al. 1999 and KEMI 2003), and the 100-fold factor was found to be justified. 

The 100-fold safety factor has traditionally been interpreted as the product of two factors with default values of 10. For example, according to WHO/IPCS (1987), the safety factor is intended to provide an adequate Margin of Safety (MOS) by assuming that the human being is 10 times more sensitive than the test animal and that the difference of sensitivity within the human population is in a 10-fold range. 

Default Assessment Factors Used or Suggested for the Establishment of a Regulatory Standard or Health-Based Guidance Value for Threshold Effects 

---

In subsequent sections the application of PIFs to various aspects of error reduction will be described. One of the most important of these applications is the use of comprehensive lists of PIFs as a means of auditing an existing plant to identify problem areas that will give rise to increased error potential. This is one aspect of the proactive approach to error reduction that forms a major theme of this book. This application of PIFs can be used by process workers as part of a participative error reduction program. This is an important feature of the human factors assessment methodology (HFAM) approach discussed in Section 2.7. 

Exposure assessment involves the specification of values for parameters, either for direct determination of the exposure or as input for mechanistic or empirical or distribution-based models that are used to fill the exposure scenario with adequate information. Numerical values for exposure parameters are obtained using various approaches, such as the USEPA s Exposure Factors Handbook (USEPA, 1997a), the European Union s (EU) Technical Guidance Document (EU, 2003), the German XProb project (Mekel, 2003) and the European KTL s ExpoFacts (Vuori et al., 2006). 

Under the generic name of socially responsible investment, there are actually a multitude of different philosophies ethics, sustainable development, materiality of extra-financial factors, etc. These various approaches differ as regards both the criteria and analytical tools used to assess corporate behaviour and performance, and the techniques used to build portfolios. 

In a deterministic approach, we obtain a single value of the two parameters and can obtain the factor of safety against failure. However, the advantages of assessing using probabilistic approach are (i) the outcome is expressed as a (estimated) likelihood of failure by taking into account various sources of uncertainty involved in the assessment (ii) sensitivity analysis can be conducted to identify key factors that affect the outcome (the results are useful to improve the... 

Absorption across biological membranes is often necessary for a chemical to manifest toxicity. In many cases several membranes need to be crossed and the structure of both the chemical and the membrane need to be evaluated in the process. The major routes of absorption are ingestion, inhalation, dermal and, in the case of exposures in aquatic systems, gills. Factors that influence absorption have been reviewed recently. Methods to assess absorption include in vivo, in vitro, various cellular cultures as well as modelling approaches. Solubility and permeability are barriers to absorption and guidelines have been developed to estimate the likelihood of candidate molecules being absorbed after oral administration. ... 

For joint action in innovation systems and especially also for outlining the framework conditions by the political actors, it is expedient to understand the itmovation systems. The model developed in the scope of the project serves to create a systematic hnk between the framework conditions, the influential factors and the correlations between the participants. The various contributory parties can better assess their own options for influence, existing resistance to new ideas, possible coahtions or the significance of market trends, and can approach change processes in a more purposeful way as a resrrlt of this. 

The book begins with a chapter describing the history and growth of CALPHAD. This provides a useful point of departure for a more detailed account of the various strands which make up the CALPHAD approach. Chapters 3 and 4 then deal with the basic thermodynamics of phase diagrams and the principles of various experimental techniques. This is because one of basic pillars of the CALPHAD approach is the concept of coupling phase diagram information with all other available thermodynamic properties. It is a key factor in the assessment and characterisation of the lower-order systems on which the properties of the higher-... 

---