ALBERT

All Library Books, journals and Electronic Records Telegrafenberg

feed icon rss

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
  • 1
    Publication Date: 1981-12-01
    Print ISSN: 0005-2736
    Electronic ISSN: 1879-2642
    Topics: Biology , Chemistry and Pharmacology , Medicine , Physics
    Published by Elsevier
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    Electronic Resource
    Electronic Resource
    Oxford, UK : Blackwell Publishing Ltd
    Risk analysis 19 (1999), S. 0 
    ISSN: 1539-6924
    Source: Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005
    Topics: Energy, Environment Protection, Nuclear Power Engineering
    Notes: We investigated the way results of human health risk assessments are used, and the theory used to describe those methods, sometimes called the “NAS paradigm.” Contrary to a key tenet of that theory, current methods have strictly limited utility. The characterizations now considered standard, Safety Indices such as “Acceptable Daily Intake,”“Reference Dose,” and so on, usefully inform only decisions that require a choice between two policy alternatives (e.g., approve a food additive or not), decided solely on the basis of a finding of safety. Riskis characterized as the quotient of one of these Safety Indices divided by an estimate of exposure: a quotient greater than one implies that the situation may be considered safe. Such decisions are very widespread, both in the U. S. federal government and elsewhere. No current method is universal; different policies lead to different practices, for example, in California's “Proposition 65,” where statutory provisions specify some practices. Further, an important kind of human health risk assessment is not recognized by this theory: this kind characterizes risk as likelihood of harm, given estimates of exposure consequent to various decision choices. Likelihood estimates are necessary whenever decision makers have many possible decision choices and must weigh more than two societal values, such as in EPA's implementation of “conventional air pollutants.” These estimates can not be derived using current methods; different methods are needed. Our analysis suggests changes needed in both the theory and practice of human health risk assessment, and how what is done is depicted.
    Type of Medium: Electronic Resource
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    Electronic Resource
    Electronic Resource
    Springer
    Risk analysis 19 (1999), S. 231-247 
    ISSN: 1539-6924
    Keywords: Health risk assessment ; hazard characterization ; Acceptable Daily Intake ; Reference Dose ; paradigm ; practices ; cancer ; non-cancer ; Bayesian ; default options
    Source: Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2000
    Topics: Energy, Environment Protection, Nuclear Power Engineering
    Notes: Abstract We investigated the way results of human health risk assessments are used, and the theory used to describe those methods, sometimes called the “NAS paradigm.” Contrary to a key tenet of that theory, current methods have strictly limited utility. The characterizations now considered standard, Safety Indices such as “Acceptable Daily Intake,” “Reference Dose,” and so on, usefully inform only decisions that require a choice between two policy alternatives (e.g., approve a food additive or not), decided solely on the basis of a finding of safety. Risk is characterized as the quotient of one of these Safety Indices divided by an estimate of exposure: a quotient greater than one implies that the situation may be considered safe. Such decisions are very widespread, both in the U. S. federal government and elsewhere. No current method is universal; different policies lead to different practices, for example, in California's “Proposition 65,” where statutory provisions specify some practices. Further, an important kind of human health risk assessment is not recognized by this theory: this kind characterizes risk as likelihood of harm, given estimates of exposure consequent to various decision choices. Likelihood estimates are necessary whenever decision makers have many possible decision choices and must weigh more than two societal values, such as in EPA's implementation of “conventional air pollutants.” These estimates can not be derived using current methods; different methods are needed. Our analysis suggests changes needed in both the theory and practice of human health risk assessment, and how what is done is depicted.
    Type of Medium: Electronic Resource
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...