Regulatory risk assessment

Forbes VE, Hommen U, Thorbek P et al (2010) Ecological models in support of regulatory risk assessments of pesticides developing a strategy for the future. Int Environ Assess Manage 6 191-193... 

Most scientists would hold that these unknowns and uncertainties in the regulatory risk-assessment model would tend to favor risk overestimation rather than underestimation or accurate prediction. While this view seems correct, it must be admitted that there is no epidemiological method available to test the hypothesis of an extra lifetime cancer risk of about 10 per 1000 000 from methylene chloride in drinking water. The same conclusion holds for most environmental carcinogens. It is also the case that more uncertainties attend the risk assessment process than we have indicated above. 

During the last 10 years it has been attempted to develop in vitro methods as alternative methods in the study of effects where animal models have previously been necessary. Such effects include skin and eye irritation and specific organ damage. Validation programs have been launched, and some of the above-mentioned methods have been sufficiently validated for use in regulatory risk assessment of chemical substances and may now for certain purposes be used as stand-alone evidence. Results from nonvahdated methods can in some cases be used as supportive evidence to human and animal data. 

ECETOC. 2002. The use ofTZS estimates and alternative methods in the regulatory risk assessment of nonthreshold carcinogens in the European Union. Technical Report No. 83. Brussels ECETOC. 

Moolgavkar SH (1995) When and how to combine results from multiple epidemiological studies in risk assessment. In Graham JD ed. The role of epidemiology in regulatory risk assessment. Amsterdam, Elsevier Press. 

Comber, M.H.I., Walker, J.D., Watts, C. and Hermens, J. (2003) Quantitative structure-activity relationships for predicting potential ecological hazard of organic chemicals for use in regulatory risk assessments. Environ Toxicol Chem, 22, 1822-1828. 

It follows that TVOC is difficult to use for normal regulatory risk assessment the scientific basis for this is just too small and no D-R relations have been established. TVOC at this point should only be used for screening and not for definitive conclusions. In addition, TVOC should only be associated with sensory irritation and only if there are substantial indications that VOC is a problem. In each specific case, if unusual compounds and concentrations are identified, the use of TVOC should be stopped. If TVOC is in the mg/m3 range, additional alternative methods should be used to draw any conclusions. 

Ecological Models for Regulatory Risk Assessments of Pesticides ... 

Significant uncertainty exists in the current risk assessment of bisphenol A, which has led to the EU regulatory risk assessment conclusion that further risk data need to be collected, especially because it is a potential endocrine disruptor. Under the systems framework, recommendations would apply during the time necessary to collect further information on bisphenol A, thereby providing a... 

I suggest that the threshold/no-threshold dichotomy applied in the regulatory risk assessment model probably greatly over-simplifies reality, and tends to create an overly narrow view of the possible implications for human health of what is known about the full range of toxic responses produced by environmental chemicals. Let s expand on this. 

Other principles related to other aspects of the regulatory risk assessment process are important, but these eight are the major ones. 

The TVOC has been used as an indicator for lAQ as well as a label parameter for building products. It has even been used to evaluate the lAQ. However, the latest research indicates that the TVOC is an indicator for the presence of VOC indoors, but it can be used in relation to exposure characterisation and source identifications for VOCs only [63]. The TVOC cannot be used as an indicator for the presence of other pollutants and it cannot be used for normal regulatory risk assessment. 

Imbus HR. 1988. A review of regulatory risk assessment with formaldehyde as an example. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 8 356-366. 

This chapter aims to discuss of cancer risks and hormesis within the U.S. regulatory risk assessment practices, which legally require the characterization of causal relations between exposures or doses and responses to quantify the probability of cancer response. Causal reasoning characterizes environmental decision-making (EPA 2005 statement in square brackets added) because ... 

CURRENT STATUS OF HAZARD TESTING FOR CANCER FOR REGULATORY RISK ASSESSMENT 379... 

---