Skip to main content
PMC home page
Environmental Health Perspectives logoLink to Environmental Health Perspectives
. 1993 Jun;101(2):100–104. doi: 10.1289/ehp.93101100

Risk assessment: the perspective and experience of U.S. environmentalists.

E K Silbergeld 1
PMCID: PMC1519738  PMID: 8354185

Abstract

Risk assessment is a set of decision rules widely used in the United States for identifying and quantifying the risks of chemicals and other events for adverse effects to human health, usually cancer. Scientific criticism has been directed toward the default assumptions and test methods used in risk assessment by regulatory agencies. This paper evaluates the contribution of risk assessment as an instrument of public policy toward the timely and efficient resolution of controversial issues in environmental and occupational health. Experience with risk assessment during the past decade does not support its utility in this regard. Alternatives to risk assessment in its current formulation are discussed.

Full text

PDF
100

Images in this article

100p100-a
on p.100

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Ames B. N., Gold L. S. Chemical carcinogenesis: too many rodent carcinogens. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1990 Oct;87(19):7772–7776. doi: 10.1073/pnas.87.19.7772. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bailar J. C., 3rd, Crouch E. A., Shaikh R., Spiegelman D. One-hit models of carcinogenesis: conservative or not? Risk Anal. 1988 Dec;8(4):485–497. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1988.tb01189.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Cohen S. M., Ellwein L. B. Cell proliferation in carcinogenesis. Science. 1990 Aug 31;249(4972):1007–1011. doi: 10.1126/science.2204108. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Doll R., Peto R. The causes of cancer: quantitative estimates of avoidable risks of cancer in the United States today. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1981 Jun;66(6):1191–1308. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Finkel A. M. Dioxin: are we safer now than before? Risk Anal. 1988 Jun;8(2):161–165. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1988.tb01164.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Gold L. S., Slone T. H., Stern B. R., Manley N. B., Ames B. N. Rodent carcinogens: setting priorities. Science. 1992 Oct 9;258(5080):261–265. doi: 10.1126/science.1411524. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Hoel D. G., Davis D. L., Miller A. B., Sondik E. J., Swerdlow A. J. Trends in cancer mortality in 15 industrialized countries, 1969-1986. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1992 Mar 4;84(5):313–320. doi: 10.1093/jnci/84.5.313. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Huff J., Haseman J., Rall D. Scientific concepts, value, and significance of chemical carcinogenesis studies. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol. 1991;31:621–652. doi: 10.1146/annurev.pa.31.040191.003201. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Johnson E. S., Lucier G. Perspectives on risk assessment impact of recent reports on benzene. Am J Ind Med. 1992;21(5):749–757. doi: 10.1002/ajim.4700210513. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Lave L. B., Ennever F. K., Rosenkranz H. S., Omenn G. S. Information value of the rodent bioassay. Nature. 1988 Dec 15;336(6200):631–633. doi: 10.1038/336631a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Perera F., Boffetta P. Perspectives of comparing risks of environmental carcinogens. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1988 Oct 19;80(16):1282–1293. doi: 10.1093/jnci/80.16.1282. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Roach S. A., Rappaport S. M. But they are not thresholds: a critical analysis of the documentation of Threshold Limit Values. Am J Ind Med. 1990;17(6):727–753. doi: 10.1002/ajim.4700170607. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Slovic P. Perception of risk. Science. 1987 Apr 17;236(4799):280–285. doi: 10.1126/science.3563507. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Swenberg J. A., Short B., Borghoff S., Strasser J., Charbonneau M. The comparative pathobiology of alpha 2u-globulin nephropathy. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 1989 Jan;97(1):35–46. doi: 10.1016/0041-008x(89)90053-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Zeckhauser R. J., Viscusi W. K. Risk within reason. Science. 1990 May 4;248(4955):559–564. doi: 10.1126/science.2333509. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Environmental Health Perspectives are provided here courtesy of National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences

RESOURCES