Author
Listed:
- Claire McAuley
- Ave Dersch
- Lisa N. Kates
- Darryel R. Sowan
- Christopher A. Ollson
Abstract
As industrial development is increasing near northern Canadian communities, human health risk assessments (HHRA) are conducted to assess the predicted magnitude of impacts of chemical emissions on human health. One exposure pathway assessed for First Nations communities is the consumption of traditional plants, such as muskeg tea (Labrador tea) (Ledum/Rhododendron groenlandicum) and mint (Mentha arvensis). These plants are used to make tea and are not typically consumed in their raw form. Traditional practices were used to harvest muskeg tea leaves and mint leaves by two First Nations communities in northern Alberta, Canada. Under the direction of community elders, community youth collected and dried plants to make tea. Soil, plant, and tea decoction samples were analyzed for inorganic elements using inductively coupled plasma‐mass spectrometry. Concentrations of inorganic elements in the tea decoctions were orders of magnitude lower than in the vegetation (e.g., manganese 0.107 mg/L in tea, 753 mg/kg in leaves). For barium, the practice of assessing ingestion of raw vegetation would have resulted in a hazard quotient (HQ) greater than the benchmark of 0.2. Using measured tea concentrations it was determined that exposure would result in risk estimates orders of magnitude below the HQ benchmark of 0.2 (HQ = 0.0049 and 0.017 for muskeg and mint tea, respectively). An HHRA calculating exposure to tea vegetation through direct ingestion of the leaves may overestimate risk. The results emphasize that food preparation methods must be considered when conducting an HHRA. This study illustrates how collaboration between Western scientists and First Nations communities can add greater clarity to risk assessments.
Suggested Citation
Claire McAuley & Ave Dersch & Lisa N. Kates & Darryel R. Sowan & Christopher A. Ollson, 2016.
"Improving Risk Assessment Calculations for Traditional Foods Through Collaborative Research with First Nations Communities,"
Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(12), pages 2195-2207, December.
Handle:
RePEc:wly:riskan:v:36:y:2016:i:12:p:2195-2207
DOI: 10.1111/risa.12578
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:36:y:2016:i:12:p:2195-2207. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.