Quantitative estimates of risk for noncancer endpoints.
While quantitative estimates of risk have been a standard practice in cancer risk assessment for many years, no similar practice is evident in noncancer risk assessment. We use two recent examples involving methylmercury and arsenic to illustrate the negative impact of this discrepancy on risk communication and cost-benefit analysis. We argue for a more balanced treatment of cancer and noncancer risks and suggest an approach for reaching this goal.
Clewell
Harvey J
HJ
ENVIRON Health Sciences Institute, Ruston, LA, USA.
Crump
Kenny S
KS
D001151:Arsenic / Q000494:pharmacology; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D004305:Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; D004781:Environmental Exposure; D015386:Hazardous Substances; D006801:Humans; D008767:Methylmercury Compounds / Q000494:pharmacology; D009369:Neoplasms / Q000139:chemically induced* / Q000188:drug therapy / Q000209:etiology; D019055:No-Observed-Adverse-Effect Level; D012016:Reference Values; D012306:Risk; D018570:Risk Assessment / Q000379:methods*; D013997:Time Factors; D014481:United States; D014484:United States Environmental Protection Agency; D014486:United States Food and Drug Administration
D015386:Hazardous Substances; D008767:Methylmercury Compounds; D001151:Arsenic