Cumulative dietary exposure to a selected group of pesticides of the triazole group in different European countries according to the EFSA guidance on probabilistic modelling
Language English Country England, Great Britain Media print-electronic
Document type Comparative Study, Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
PubMed
25125392
DOI
10.1016/j.fct.2014.08.004
PII: S0278-6915(14)00376-7
Knihovny.cz E-resources
- Keywords
- Acute exposure, Chronic exposure, Cumulative Assessment Group, Cumulative dietary exposure, EFSA, Probabilistic modelling,
- MeSH
- Diet Surveys MeSH
- Diet adverse effects MeSH
- Child MeSH
- Adult MeSH
- Ecotoxicology methods MeSH
- European Union MeSH
- Risk Assessment standards MeSH
- Food Contamination * MeSH
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Meat adverse effects analysis MeSH
- Adolescent MeSH
- Young Adult MeSH
- Milk adverse effects chemistry MeSH
- Pesticides analysis toxicity MeSH
- Pesticide Residues analysis toxicity MeSH
- Cattle MeSH
- Guidelines as Topic MeSH
- Models, Statistical * MeSH
- Feasibility Studies MeSH
- Triazoles analysis toxicity MeSH
- Animals MeSH
- Check Tag
- Child MeSH
- Adult MeSH
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Adolescent MeSH
- Young Adult MeSH
- Male MeSH
- Cattle MeSH
- Female MeSH
- Animals MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
- Comparative Study MeSH
- Names of Substances
- Pesticides MeSH
- Pesticide Residues MeSH
- Triazoles MeSH
The practicality was examined of performing a cumulative dietary exposure assessment according to the requirements of the EFSA guidance on probabilistic modelling. For this the acute and chronic cumulative exposure to triazole pesticides was estimated using national food consumption and monitoring data of eight European countries. Both the acute and chronic cumulative dietary exposures were calculated according to two model runs (optimistic and pessimistic) as recommended in the EFSA guidance. The exposures obtained with these model runs differed substantially for all countries, with the highest exposures obtained with the pessimistic model run. In this model run, animal commodities including cattle milk and different meat types, entered in the exposure calculations at the level of the maximum residue limit (MRL), contributed most to the exposure. We conclude that application of the optimistic model run on a routine basis for cumulative assessments is feasible. The pessimistic model run is laborious and the exposure results could be too far from reality. More experience with this approach is needed to stimulate the discussion of the feasibility of all the requirements, especially the inclusion of MRLs of animal commodities which seem to result in unrealistic conclusions regarding their contribution to the dietary exposure.
Biometris Wageningen University and Research Centre P O Box 16 6700 AA Wageningen The Netherlands
Ministry of Health State General Laboratory 44 Kimonos Street 1451 Nicosia Cyprus
National Food Agency Risk Benefit Assessment Department Box 622 751 26 Uppsala Sweden
National Institute for Public Health and the Environment Box 1 NL 3720 BA Bilthoven The Netherlands
References provided by Crossref.org
