Dataset Information

Moving towards a holistic approach for human health risk assessment - Is the current approach fit for purpose?

ABSTRACT: It is recognised that new scientific improvements and their integration in risk assessment, as outlined in the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine 2017 report, have the potential to improve human health risk assessments by enabling a mechanistic understanding of adverse effects and more accurate predictions of biological responses. Here, I discuss why such improvements are needed and can ease a paradigm shift in human health risk assessment. The current approach to human health risk assessment is limited by several elements: (1) the relevance of data is debatable, as they are largely based on in vivo animal models that are poorly predictive for complex endpoints, raise challenges with regard to interspecies extrapolations, and are seldom informative of the mechanism underlying the observed effects; (2) lack of flexibility in data requirements by regulators, which limits the uptake of new scientific developments in a timely manner; and (3) lack of data accessibility, which makes data integration difficult. However, mechanistic-based assessments are currently conducted for the identification of endocrine disruptors and are developed for addressing developmental neurotoxicity. Such assessments can serve as examples for changing the paradigm of risk assessment. There are several opportunities for improvement, such as: make regulatory standard requirements less prescriptive; enhance and use the opportunities for read-across; analyse and quantify uncertainties in order to benchmark new approach methods to the current system; better integrate screening methods early in regulatory assessments and decision-making; and develop more adverse outcome pathways in order to link new approach methods with the current approach and ultimately make it possible to base regulatory decisions on early key events of a toxicity pathway.

SUBMITTER: Bennekou SH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7015490 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Moving towards a holistic approach for human health risk assessment - Is the current approach fit for purpose?

Bennekou Susanne Hougaard SH

EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority 20190708 Suppl 1

It is recognised that new scientific improvements and their integration in risk assessment, as outlined in the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine 2017 report, have the potential to improve human health risk assessments by enabling a mechanistic understanding of adverse effects and more accurate predictions of biological responses. Here, I discuss why such improvements are needed and can ease a paradigm shift in human health risk assessment. The current approach to human hea ...[more]

PMID: 32626448

Similar Datasets

Project description:Approximately 13% of the total UK workforce is employed in the health and care sector. Despite substantial workforce planning efforts, the effectiveness of this planning has been criticised. Education, training, and workforce plans have typically considered each health-care profession in isolation and have not adequately responded to changing health and care needs. The results are persistent vacancies, poor morale, and low retention. Areas of particular concern highlighted in this Health Policy paper include primary care, mental health, nursing, clinical and non-clinical support, and social care. Responses to workforce shortfalls have included a high reliance on foreign and temporary staff, small-scale changes in skill mix, and enhanced recruitment drives. Impending challenges for the UK health and care workforce include growing multimorbidity, an increasing shortfall in the supply of unpaid carers, and the relative decline of the attractiveness of the National Health Service (NHS) as an employer internationally. We argue that to secure a sustainable and fit-for-purpose health and care workforce, integrated workforce approaches need to be developed alongside reforms to education and training that reflect changes in roles and skill mix, as well as the trend towards multidisciplinary working. Enhancing career development opportunities, promoting staff wellbeing, and tackling discrimination in the NHS are all needed to improve recruitment, retention, and morale of staff. An urgent priority is to offer sufficient aftercare and support to staff who have been exposed to high-risk situations and traumatic experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic. In response to growing calls to recognise and reward health and care staff, growth in pay must at least keep pace with projected rises in average earnings, which in turn will require linking future NHS funding allocations to rises in pay. Through illustrative projections, we show that, to sustain annual growth in the workforce at approximately 2·4%, increases in NHS expenditure of 4% annually in real terms will be required. Above all, a radical long-term strategic vision is needed to ensure that the future NHS workforce is fit for purpose.

Project description:Pre-market/prospective environmental risk assessments (ERAs) contribute to risk analyses performed to facilitate decisions about the market introduction of regulated stressors. Robust ERAs begin with an explicit problem formulation, which involves among other steps: (1) formally devising plausible pathways to harm that describe how the deployment of a regulated stressor could be harmful; (2) formulating risk hypotheses about the likelihood and severity of such events; (3) identifying the information that will be useful to test the risk hypotheses; and (4) developing a plan to acquire new data for hypothesis testing should tests with existing information be insufficient for decision-making. Here, we apply problem formulation to the assessment of possible adverse effects of RNA interference-based insecticidal genetically modified (GM) plants, GM growth hormone coho salmon, gene drive-modified mosquitoes and classical biological weed control agents on non-target organisms in a prospective manner, and of neonicotinoid insecticides on bees in a retrospective manner. In addition, specific considerations for the problem formulation for the ERA of nanomaterials and for landscape-scale population-level ERAs are given. We argue that applying problem formulation to ERA maximises the usefulness of ERA studies for decision-making, through an iterative process, because: (1) harm is defined explicitly from the start; (2) the construction of risk hypotheses is guided by policy rather than an exhaustive attempt to address any possible differences; (3) existing information is used effectively; (4) new data are collected with a clear purpose; (5) risk is characterised against well-defined criteria of hypothesis corroboration or falsification; and (6) risk assessment conclusions can be communicated clearly. However, problem formulation is still often hindered by the absence of clear policy goals and decision-making criteria (e.g. definition of protection goals and what constitutes harm) that are needed to guide the interpretation of scientific information. We therefore advocate further dialogue between risk assessors and risk managers to clarify how ERAs can address policy goals and decision-making criteria. Ideally, this dialogue should take place for all classes of regulated stressors, as this can promote alignment and consistency on the desired level of protection and maximum tolerable impacts across regulated stressors.

Dataset Information

Moving towards a holistic approach for human health risk assessment - Is the current approach fit for purpose?

Publications

Moving towards a holistic approach for human health risk assessment - Is the current approach fit for purpose?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets