Dataset Information

Qualitative approach to comparative exposure in alternatives assessment.

ABSTRACT: Most alternatives assessments (AAs) published to date are largely hazard-based rankings, thereby ignoring potential differences in human and/or ecosystem exposures; as such, they may not represent a fully informed consideration of the advantages and disadvantages of possible alternatives. Building on the 2014 US National Academy of Sciences recommendations to improve AA decisions by including comparative exposure assessment into AAs, the Health and Environmental Sciences Institute's (HESI) Sustainable Chemical Alternatives Technical Committee, which comprises scientists from academia, industry, government, and nonprofit organizations, developed a qualitative comparative exposure approach. Conducting such a comparison can screen for alternatives that are expected to have a higher or different routes of human or environmental exposure potential, which together with consideration of the hazard assessment, could trigger a higher tiered, more quantitative exposure assessment on the alternatives being considered, minimizing the likelihood of regrettable substitution. This article outlines an approach for including chemical ingredient- and product-related exposure information in a qualitative comparison, including ingredient and product-related parameters. A classification approach was developed for ingredient and product parameters to support comparisons between alternatives as well as a methodology to address exposure parameter relevance and data quality. The ingredient parameters include a range of physicochemical properties that can impact routes and magnitude of exposure, whereas the product parameters include aspects such as product-specific exposure pathways, use information, accessibility, and disposal. Two case studies are used to demonstrate the application of the methodology. Key learnings and future research needs are summarized. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2018;00:000-000. © 2018 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).

SUBMITTER: Greggs W

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6899567 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Qualitative approach to comparative exposure in alternatives assessment.

Greggs William W Burns Thomas T Egeghy Peter P Embry Michelle R MR Fantke Peter P Gaborek Bonnie B Heine Lauren L Jolliet Olivier O Lee Carolyn C Muir Derek D Plotzke Kathy K Rinkevich Joseph J Sunger Neha N Tanir Jennifer Y JY Whittaker Margaret M

Integrated environmental assessment and management 20180719 6

Most alternatives assessments (AAs) published to date are largely hazard-based rankings, thereby ignoring potential differences in human and/or ecosystem exposures; as such, they may not represent a fully informed consideration of the advantages and disadvantages of possible alternatives. Building on the 2014 US National Academy of Sciences recommendations to improve AA decisions by including comparative exposure assessment into AAs, the Health and Environmental Sciences Institute's (HESI) Susta ...[more]

PMID: 29917303

Similar Datasets

Project description:Toxicology is traditionally divided between human and eco-toxicology. In the shared pursuit of environmental health, this separation does not account for discoveries made in the comparative studies of animal genomes. Here, we provide evidence on the feasibility of understanding the health impact of chemicals on all animals, including ecological keystone species and humans, based on a significant number of conserved genes and their functional associations to health-related outcomes across much of animal diversity. We test four conditions to understand the value of comparative genomics data to inform mechanism-based human and environmental hazard assessment: (1) genes that are most fundamental for health evolved early during animal evolution; (2) the molecular functions of pathways are better conserved among distantly related species than the individual genes that are members of these pathways; (3) the most conserved pathways among animals are those that cause adverse health outcomes when disrupted; (4) gene sets that serve as molecular signatures of biological processes or disease-states are largely enriched by evolutionarily conserved genes across the animal phylogeny. The concept of homology is applied in a comparative analysis of gene families and pathways among invertebrate and vertebrate species compared with humans. Results show that over 70% of gene families associated with disease are shared among the greatest variety of animal species through evolution. Pathway conservation between invertebrates and humans is based on the degree of conservation within vertebrates and the number of interacting genes within the human network. Human gene sets that already serve as biomarkers are enriched by evolutionarily conserved genes across the animal phylogeny. By implementing a comparative method for chemical hazard assessment, human and eco-toxicology converge towards a more holistic and mechanistic understanding of toxicity disrupting biological processes that are important for health and shared among animals (including humans).

Dataset Information

Qualitative approach to comparative exposure in alternatives assessment.

Publications

Qualitative approach to comparative exposure in alternatives assessment.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets