Statistical Methods for the Toxicological Evaluation of the Additivity Assumption as Used in the Environmental Protection Agency Chemical Mixture Risk Assessment Guidelines

Author(s):  
David J. Svendsgaard ◽  
Richard C. Hertzberg
1990 ◽  
Vol 6 (5) ◽  
pp. 199-216 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annie M. Jarabek ◽  
William H. Farland

This paper has been reviewed by the Office of Health and Environmental Assessment, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Agency, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. In 1983, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences (U.S. NAS) proposed a framework for the processes of risk assessment and risk management in government agencies (U.S. NAS, 1983). Using the U.S. NAS scheme as an organizing principle, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) published guidelines pertaining to risk assessment in five areas: estimating exposures, chemical mixtures, mutagenicity, suspect developmental toxicity and carcinogenicity. These guidelines were developed to promote high technical quality and consistent practice of risk assessment Agencywide. This paper will discuss the historical development of the guidelines and their role in the work performed by the Agency. Each of the five (5) guidelines is outlined and anticipated revisions discussed. Related assessment activities and new subject areas are also presented.


2006 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
K A Mundt

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently issued a Staff Paper that articulates current risk assessment practices. In section 4.1.3, EPA states,“...effects that appear to be adaptive, non–adverse, or beneficial may not be mentioned.” This statement may be perceived as precluding risk assessments based on non–default risk models, including the hormetic–or biphasicdose–response model. This commentary examines several potential interpretations of this statement and the anticipated impact of ignoring hormesis, if present, in light of necessary conservatism for protecting human and environmental health, and the potential for employing alternative risk assessment approaches.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document