An Assessment of Integrated Risk Assessment |
| |
Authors: | Theo Vermeire Wayne R. Munns Jr. Jun Sekizawa Glenn Suter Glen Van der Kraak |
| |
Affiliation: | 1. National Institute of Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) , Bilthoven, The Netherlands;2. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory (NHEERL) , Narragansett, RI, USA;3. Tokushima University, Faculty of Integrated Arts and Science , Tokushima, Japan;4. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA) , Cincinnati, OH, USA;5. University of Guelph, College of Biological Science , Guelph, ON, Canada |
| |
Abstract: | In order to promote international understanding and acceptance of the integrated risk assessment process, the World Health Organization/International Programme on Chemical Safety (WHO/IPCS), in collaboration with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, initiated a number of activities related to integrated risk assessment. In this project, the WHO/IPCS defines integrated risk assessment as a science-based approach that combines the processes of risk estimation for humans, biota, and natural resources in one assessment. This article explores the strengths and weaknesses of integration as identified up to this date and the degree of acceptance of this concept by the global risk assessment/risk management community. It discusses both opportunities and impediments for further development and implementation. The major emerging opportunities for an integrated approach stem from the increasing societal and political pressure to move away from vertebrate testing leading to a demand for scientific integrated approaches to in vitro and in vivo testing, as well as to computer simulations, in so-called Intelligent Testing Strategies. In addition, by weighing the evidence from conventional mammalian toxicology, ecotoxicology, human epidemiology, and eco-epidemiology, risk assessors could better characterize mechanisms of action and the forms of the relationships of exposures to responses. It is concluded that further demonstrations of scientific, economic and regulatory benefits of an integrated approach are needed. As risk assessment is becoming more mechanistic and molecular this may create an integrated approach based on common mechanisms and a common systems-biology approach. |
| |
Keywords: | integrated risk assessment environment health. |
|
|