Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Current risk assessment approaches in different countries.

J C Larsen1, W Farland, D Winters

  • 1Institute of Food Safety and Toxicology, Danish Veterinary and Food Administration, Søborg, Denmark. jcr@foir.dk

Food Additives and Contaminants
|July 27, 2000
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Recommendations to improve collaboration and expedite acceptance of animal models.

Veterinary pathology·2013
Same author

Animal models for Francisella tularensis and Burkholderia species: scientific and regulatory gaps toward approval of antibiotics under the FDA Animal Rule.

Veterinary pathology·2013
Same author

EuroFIR eBASIS: application for health claims submissions and evaluations.

European journal of clinical nutrition·2010
Same author

Stratospheric N(2)O mixing ratio profile from high-resolution balloon-borne solar absorption spectra and laboratory spectra near 1880 cm(-1).

Applied optics·2010
Same author

Spectral shape of the two-photon decay of the 2 1S0 state in he-like tin.

Physical review letters·2010
Same author

Evaluation of certain food additives and contaminants.

World Health Organization technical report series·2008
Same journal

Update on the progress in acrylamide and furan research. Proceedings of the DG Sanco/CIAA sponsored workshop "Acrylamide" and joint DG Sanco/EFSA/DG JRC workshop "Furan in food." March 16-17, 20006 and May 19, 2006, respectively. Brussels, Belgium.

Food additives and contaminants·2008
Same journal

Food additives and contaminants.

Food additives and contaminants·2007
Same journal

Index of authors---volume 24.

Food additives and contaminants·2007
Same journal

High-performance liquid chromatographic method for the simultaneous detection of the adulteration of cereal flours with melamine and related triazine by-products ammeline, ammelide, and cyanuric acid.

Food additives and contaminants·2007
Same journal

Mycotoxin occurrence and Aspergillus flavus soil propagules in a corn and cotton glyphosate-resistant cropping systems.

Food additives and contaminants·2007
Same journal

Occurrence and fate of Fusarium mycotoxins during commercial processing of oats in the UK.

Food additives and contaminants·2007
See all related articles

Polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins, dibenzofurans, and biphenyls (PCDD/Fs/PCBs) are toxic compounds. Risk assessments vary globally, with a focus on reducing environmental contamination to protect public health.

Area of Science:

  • Environmental Chemistry
  • Toxicology
  • Risk Assessment

Background:

  • Polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDs), dibenzofurans (PCDFs), and biphenyls (PCBs) are persistent environmental contaminants.
  • These toxic congeners share a common mechanism of action via Ah-receptor binding.
  • Toxic equivalency factors (TEFs) are used to calculate toxic equivalent (TEQ) concentrations in various matrices.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To review and compare different risk assessment approaches for PCDDs, PCDFs, and dioxin-like PCBs.
  • To highlight the global divergence in risk assessment methodologies, particularly regarding carcinogenicity.
  • To underscore the growing concern over non-cancer effects and the need for source reduction.

Main Methods:

  • Review of existing risk assessment frameworks and methodologies.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Comparison of approaches used by international bodies (WHO) and national agencies (US EPA, USFDA).
  • Analysis of data used for deriving Tolerable Daily Intakes (TDIs) and Risk Specific Doses (RsDs).

    • Main Results:

    • Two primary risk assessment approaches exist: threshold-based (TDI) and non-threshold (RsD).
    • WHO and most countries use TDI based on rodent carcinogenicity, assuming a threshold.
    • US EPA and USFDA use probabilistic methods for cancer risk, treating it as a non-threshold effect.

    Conclusions:

    • Global risk assessments for PCDDs, PCDFs, and PCBs differ, especially concerning carcinogenicity.
    • There is increasing attention on non-cancer effects of these compounds.
    • All assessments emphasize the critical need to minimize environmental sources of contamination.