Application of uncertainty analysis in assessing dietary exposure

被引:18
作者
Hart, A [1 ]
Smith, GC [1 ]
Macarthur, R [1 ]
Rose, M [1 ]
机构
[1] Cent Sci Lab, York YO41 1LZ, N Yorkshire, England
关键词
dietary exposure assessment; uncertainty analysis; probabilistic methods; dioxins;
D O I
10.1016/S0378-4274(03)00040-7
中图分类号
R99 [毒物学(毒理学)];
学科分类号
100405 ;
摘要
Conventional approaches for assessing dietary exposure to contaminants and additives in food are deterministic, using point estimates for consumption and contamination. In reality, both consumption and contamination are variable. Furthermore our knowledge of them is uncertain, e.g. due to measurement uncertainty. Conventional approaches attempt to allow for this by using worst-case assumptions of safety factors, but these are often subjective and may result either in overestimation or underestimation of the true range of exposures. Probabilistic approaches take account of variability and uncertainty by using distributions rather than point estimates for consumption and contamination. The outputs are distributions for exposure, which provide a more complete and balanced description of risk for the decision-maker. These approaches also facilitate the use of sensitivity analysis to identify those factors that impact most on exposure, and to identify areas of uncertainty where additional data will improve exposure estimates. This paper reviews examples of the application of these methods to the assessment of dietary exposure to food contaminants, including dioxins in seafood, where it was found that the greatest uncertainties relate to toxicity rather than exposure. Further work required to implement probabilistic approaches for dietary exposure assessment is discussed. Crown Copyright (C) 2003 Published by Elsevier Science Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:437 / 442
页数:6
相关论文
共 33 条
[1]  
Analy Methods Comm, 2001, ANALYST, V126, P256
[2]   An introduction to second-order random variables in human health risk assessments [J].
Burmaster, DE ;
Wilson, AM .
HUMAN AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT, 1996, 2 (04) :892-919
[3]  
[Ellison S.L.R. EURACHEM/CITAC EURACHEM/CITAC], 2000, Quantifying Uncertainty in Analytical Measurement
[4]  
EPA, 1997, GUID PRINC MONT CARL
[5]   What Monte Carlo methods cannot do [J].
Ferson, S .
HUMAN AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT, 1996, 2 (04) :990-1007
[6]  
FERSON S, 2001, EUR WORKSH PROB RISK, P75
[7]   Health risk assessment practices in the US Food and Drug Administration [J].
Gaylor, DW ;
Axelrad, JA ;
Brown, RP ;
Cavagnaro, JA ;
Cyr, WH ;
Hulebak, KL ;
Lorentzen, RJ ;
Miller, MA ;
Mulligan, LT ;
Schwetz, BA .
REGULATORY TOXICOLOGY AND PHARMACOLOGY, 1997, 26 (03) :307-321
[8]   UNCERTAINTY AND SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS OF FOOD PATHWAY RESULTS WITH THE MACCS REACTOR ACCIDENT CONSEQUENCE MODEL [J].
HELTON, JC ;
JOHNSON, JD ;
ROLLSTIN, JA ;
SHIVER, AW ;
SPRUNG, JL .
RELIABILITY ENGINEERING & SYSTEM SAFETY, 1995, 49 (02) :109-144
[9]   The application of quantitative risk assessment to microbial food safety risks [J].
Jaykus, LA .
CRITICAL REVIEWS IN MICROBIOLOGY, 1996, 22 (04) :279-293
[10]   Assessment of intake from the diet [J].
Kroes, R ;
Müller, D ;
Lambe, J ;
Löwik, MRH ;
van Klaveren, J ;
Kleiner, J ;
Massey, R ;
Mayer, S ;
Urieta, I ;
Verger, P ;
Visconti, A .
FOOD AND CHEMICAL TOXICOLOGY, 2002, 40 (2-3) :327-385