Risk Assessment scaling factors

The assessment of risk of the potential incidence or escalation of conflict is called integrated because of the broad scale of factors that are considered (political, economic, social, demographic and environmental. The integrated risk assessment manages the complexity in the relationship between the consequences of stress and inhibiting or facilitating factors in order to determine which factor has the most potential impact on the incidence or escalation of conflict. 

Second, there is a procedure for scaling doses between animals and humans, to take account of differences in body size and rates of various physiological processes. Interestingly, as the EPA and other regulators practice risk assessment, animal-to-human extrapolation for carcinogens is based on the use of such scaling factors, rather than... 

A physiologically based pharmacokinetic model for predicting ethylene dibromide kinetics and consequent toxicity, based on in-vitro metabolic parameters of rodents and humans and on the use of scaling factors, has been presented (Ploemen et al., 1997). Its most important prediction is that the GST pathway is significantly active even at low ethylene dibromide concentrations, which has important implications for risk assessment. 

Probabilistic risk assessment methods are described herein for determining a popnlation s distribution of the dose from exposure and the combination of that exposnre characterization with appropriate toxicological information to form aggregate and cumulative risk assessments. An individual s dose from exposure is characterized as a set of chemical- and route-specific dose profiles over time. Toxic equivalence factors (TEFs) that reflect the toxic endpoint and exposure duration of concern are used to scale chemical- and route-specific doses to toxic equivalent doses (TEDs). The latter are combined in a temporally consistent manner to form a profile over time of the Total TED. For each individual, a Total MOE is calculated by dividing a toxicologically relevant benchmark dose (e.g. an EDio) by the individual s Total TED. The distribution of the Total MOE in a popnlation provides important information for risk management decisions. 

No drug is 100% safe in 100% of patients. Comparative evaluation, or benefit-risk balancing of pharmaceutical products is inevitable. Furthermore, there are no absolute or arithmetical standards for this it is part of the art of practicing medicine, if at a large than usual scale of conducting what is essentially an n = 1 clinical trial every time a prescription is written. Thus, the definitions and terms chosen depend entirely on the context in which they are used, and on the user, in a case-by-case manner. These complexities are not always obvious to information users, such as patients and their lawyers. But again, the factors influencing benefit-risk assessments include... 

EPA (US Environmental Protection Agency) (1992). Draft report A cross-species scaling factor for carcinogen risk assessment based on equivalence of mg/kg /day Notice. Fed Reg 57, 24152-24173. 

As a supplement to R2.2.1766-03, specific recommendations are planned on methods and criteria assessment (scales, models, etc) of workers health (morbidity, mortality, etc), workplace factors (noise, vibration, dust, chemicals, etc), work load (physical load nervous tension), and reproductive health risk assessment. Relevant data have been published in handbook on occupational risk (Izmerov Denisov, 2003). 

For risk assessment, the prediction of the pressure wave load upon buildings and industrial structures is very important. This requires the detailed knowledge of the factors influencing the flame propagation process. However, detailed and systematic investigations cannot be performed in real industrial structures. For this reason it is desirable to perform experiments in a model system with the possibility of varying many parameters systematically. The scale-up of the results to real structures must be undertaken on the basis of similarity laws. 

Risk assessment is not a precise science. The assessment of risk fundamentally considers a number of factors, namely the likelihood or probability that an accident or incident could be caused, the severity of the outcome, in terms of injury, damage or loss and the number of people affected, and the frequency of exposure to risk. A simple method of assessing it is through the use of risk ratings taking into account the factors of probability, severity and frequency on a scale from 1 to 10 in each case. (Some systems use only probability and severity factors.)... 

The process of risk assessment consists of determining (estimation) its numerical value and comparing it with the accepted criteria values. The criteria values for the individual levels of scale depend on many factors, expert assessments, as well as accepted method of risk assessment, e.g. 2, 3,4, or 5 parametric matrix method. 

Multiply the values that you have selected for consequence, exposure, and probability together to determine this risk assessment factor and find the value on the following scale. 

Alternatives have been suggested to the traditional, but arbitrarily set safety factors. Species-specihc allometric scaling factors have been proposed to account for differences in toxicokinetics between animal and human species (Falk-Filipsson et al. 2007). Other uncertainties include a lack of data showing the extent of interindividual sensitivity in humans (genetic polymorphisms), or individual sensitivity and susceptibility to chronic diseases. Because of these uncertainties, use of chemical or effect-specihc factors in chemical risk assessment has been suggested as a more appropriate approach resulting in higher conhdence of sufficient protection (Martin et al. 2013). 

---