An examination of the Environmental Protection Agency risk assessment principles and practices: a brief commentary on section 4.1.3 of the EPA March 2004 Staff Paper

Abstract

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.

Keywords

risk assessment hormesis biphasic dose–response

References

1 US Environmental Protection Agency . An examination of EPA risk assessment principles and practices. EPA/ 100/B-04/001, March, 2004.

2 Last JM . A dictionary of epidemiology, fourth edition. New York: Oxford University Press , 2001: 159-159.

3 Calabrese EJ , Baldwin LA . Toxicology rethinks its central belief . Nature 2003; 421: 691–692 .

4 Mundt KA , May S. Epidemiological assessment of hormesis in studies with low-level exposure . Hum Ecol Risk Assess 2001; 7: 795–809 .

5 Stayner L , Bailer AJ , Smith R , Gilbert S , Rice F , Kuempel E. Sources of uncertainty in dose–response modeling of epidemiological data for cancer risk assessment . Ann NY Acad Sci 1999: 895; 212–222 .