Comments: implications of hormesis for industrial hygienists

2002 ◽  
Vol 21 (7) ◽  
pp. 391-393
Author(s):  
M O Brophy

Quantitative health risk assessment is based on extrapolating from the high-dose end of the dose–response curve to points close to the origin or the threshold where the dose levels are closer to the lower environmental or occupational exposures. Hormesis is demonstrated in chronic toxicological studies where the animals treated at the lowest experimental dose appear to be healthier than the controls, as evidenced by longer life spans, less disease and/or increased body weight. If the occupational exposure limit (OEL) or environmental exposure limit (EEL) is in the range of the hormetic effect, or lower than the hormetic effect, then a case could be made that exposure at the OEL or EEL is `safe.’ This idea is controversial because it challenges some of the basic assumptions of quantitative health risk assessment as it has been practiced during the past 50 years. De-emphasis of the dose–response curve in determining OELs and EELs will occur not because of hormesis, but because the emerging sciences of genomics and proteomics will shift the focus from statistical methods to individuals as genetic and protein engineering becomes more sophisticated and powerful.

1990 ◽  
Vol 68 (7) ◽  
pp. 1017-1024 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Kuiper-Goodman

The risk assessment of mycotoxins is made up of two major components: an exposure assessment and a hazard assessment. There are many uncertainties in both of these components. This paper will briefly discuss the various aspects of the risk assessment process as it applies to mycotoxins and will then focus mainly on some of the uncertainties in the hazard assessment component of several carcinogenic mycotoxins. To arrive at an estimated "safe dose" (end point of the hazard assessment), we have previously used two major approaches: the no observed effect level (NOEL) divided by a safety factor approach and a mathematical (robust linear) extrapolation to a "virtual safe dose." Both of these approaches use only points from the no observed effect region of the dose–response curve and ignore valuable data from the response region. It is proposed to use the dose at which 50% of the animals would have developed tumors (the TD50) divided by a large safety factor of 50 000 as an additional estimate of "safe dose". For many studies, the TD50 lies within the observed response region of the dose–response curve and may have more validity. It is also suggested in certain cases that some of the uncertainties regarding the NOEL can be reduced if one uses a statistically derived no effect level (NEL).Key words: risk assessment, carcinogens, aflatoxins, ochratoxin, zearalenone, mycotoxins.


1985 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 267-285
Author(s):  
Lawrence T. Glickman ◽  
Linda M. Domanski

Alternative approaches to the use of laboratory animals for human health risk assessment have traditionally utilised in vitro techniques. We propose an expanded concept of an alternative to include epidemiological studies of pet animals with spontaneously occurring disease. Compared with humans, the use of pet animals has the advantage of a shorter latent period for development of most diseases and is less confounded by occupational exposures or self-selected personal exposures such as alcohol and tobacco consumption. In contrast to laboratory animal experiments, spontaneous tumours in pets reflect natural exposures to a wide variety of environmental carcinogens, which may be more sensitive for the evaluation of the effects of complex low level ambient exposures, such as air pollutants. Sources of data on pet populations and their diseases are described and examples of epidemiological studies in pet animals are presented. Unlike laboratory animal experiments which primarily benefit humans, research into the cause, prevention, and treatment of spontaneously occurring diseases in pet animals may benefit the individual animal and the species.


2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Vinceti ◽  
Tommaso Filippini ◽  
Marcella Malavolti ◽  
Androniki Naska ◽  
Maria‐Iosifina Kasdagli ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document