Carcinogenic risk, perception

Do animal data alter the perception of carcinogenic risk Are the preclinical data adequate to support the clinical use of the product in patients To what extent can we accept lack of experimental data before a product is used to treat humans Should a study be done if the relevance of the test system is questionable Can risks be communicated without doing a study What and whose risk is it not doing a study ... 

Section 13.2 Qualitative Risk Scenarios Section 13.3 Quantitative Risk Non-carcinogens Section 13.4 Quantitative Risk Carcinogens Section 13.5 Risk Uncertainties/Liinitations Section 13.6 Risk-Based Decision Making Section 13.7 Public Perception of Risk... 

The public s perception of toxicity and risk often differs from that found by scientific testing.16 The idea that natural 17 is better than chemical is overly simplistic. Many chemicals found in nature are extremely potent biologically. Mycotoxins are among these.18 Aflatoxins (1.4) were discovered when turkeys fed moldy ground nut (peanut) meal became ill and died. They are among the most potent carcinogens known. 

It rapidly became apparent that the reaction of ethyl pyrocarbonate in wine was more complex than indicated by the reaction shown above. Ethyl alcohol and carbon dioxide were certainly the main degradation by-products, but small quantities of ethyl carbonate were also formed, and its fruit aroma was perceptible above a certain threshold. Most importantly, ethyl pyrocarbonate is a highly reactive molecnle and combines with certain substances in wine (organic acids, polyphenols, and nitrogen-based componnds) to produce urethanes, e.g. ethyl carbamate, which is toxic and carcinogenic. Quantities never exceeded 2-4 mg/1, significantly below the ofQcial threshold of 30 mg/1 in Canada. However, this risk was sufficient for the product to be completely abandoned. 

---