IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v39y2019i2p426-438.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Probabilistic Integrated Human Mixture Risk Assessment of Multiple Metals Through Seafood Consumption

Author

Listed:
  • Yi‐Jun Lin
  • Pinpin Lin

Abstract

Inorganic arsenic (iAs), cadmium (Cd), lead (Pb), and methylmercury (MeHg) are toxic metals that cause substantial health concern and are present in various seafood items. This study linked probabilistic risk assessment to the interactive hazard index (HIINT) approach to assess the human mixture risk posed by the dietary intake of iAs, Cd, Pb, and MeHg from seafood for different age populations, and joint toxic actions and toxic interactions among metals were also considered in the assessment. We found that, in combination, an iAs–Cd–Pb–MeHg mixture synergistically causes neurological toxicity. Furthermore, an iAs–Cd–Pb mixture antagonistically causes renal and hematological effects and additively causes cardiovascular effect. Our results demonstrated that if toxic interactions are not considered, the health risk may be overestimated or underestimated. The 50th percentile HIINT estimates in all age populations for neurological, renal, cardiovascular, and hematological effects were lower than 1; however, the 97.5th percentile HIINT estimates might exceed 1. In particular, toddlers and preschoolers had the highest neurological risk, with 0.16 and 0.19 probabilities, respectively, of neurological HIINT exceeding 1. Saltwater fish consumption was the principal contributor to the health risk. We suggest that regular monitoring of metal levels in seafood, more precise dietary surveys, further toxicological data, and risk–benefit analysis of seafood consumption are warranted to improve the accuracy of human mixture risk assessment and determine optimal consumption.

Suggested Citation

  • Yi‐Jun Lin & Pinpin Lin, 2019. "Probabilistic Integrated Human Mixture Risk Assessment of Multiple Metals Through Seafood Consumption," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(2), pages 426-438, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:39:y:2019:i:2:p:426-438
    DOI: 10.1111/risa.13183
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13183
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/risa.13183?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ying Zhang & Satoshi Nakai & Shigeki Masunaga, 2009. "An Exposure Assessment of Methyl Mercury via Fish Consumption for the Japanese Population," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(9), pages 1281-1291, September.
    2. Carlos Cardoso & Inês Farias & Valentina Costa & Maria Nunes & Leonel Gordo, 2010. "Estimation of Risk Assessment of Some Heavy Metals Intake Through Black Scabbardfish (Aphanopus carbo) Consumption in Portugal," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(6), pages 952-961, June.
    3. Katherine von Stackelberg & Elizabeth Guzy & Tian Chu & Birgit Claus Henn, 2015. "Exposure to Mixtures of Metals and Neurodevelopmental Outcomes: A Multidisciplinary Review Using an Adverse Outcome Pathway Framework," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(6), pages 971-1016, June.
    4. Hamm, Robert M., 1991. "Selection of verbal probabilities: A solution for some problems of verbal probability expression," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 193-223, April.
    5. Kimberly M. Thompson, 2002. "Variability and Uncertainty Meet Risk Management and Risk Communication," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(3), pages 647-654, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. A. E. Ades & Karl Claxton & Mark Sculpher, 2006. "Evidence synthesis, parameter correlation and probabilistic sensitivity analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(4), pages 373-381, April.
    2. Katarzyna Kolesnik & Sylwia Silska-Gembka & Jerzy Gierusz, 2019. "The Interpretation of the Verbal Probability Expressions Used in The IFRS – The Differences Observed Between Polish and British Accounting Professionals," Journal of Accounting and Management Information Systems, Faculty of Accounting and Management Information Systems, The Bucharest University of Economic Studies, vol. 18(1), pages 25-49, March.
    3. repec:cup:judgdm:v:14:y:2019:i:6:p:683-695 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Bryson, Noel (Kweku-Muata) & Mobolurin, Ayodele, 1999. "A process for generating quantitative belief functions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 115(3), pages 624-633, June.
    5. Cope, S. & Frewer, L.J. & Houghton, J. & Rowe, G. & Fischer, A.R.H. & de Jonge, J., 2010. "Consumer perceptions of best practice in food risk communication and management: Implications for risk analysis policy," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 349-357, August.
    6. H. Christopher Frey, 2002. "Introduction to Special Section on Sensitivity Analysis and Summary of NCSU/USDA Workshop on Sensitivity Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(3), pages 539-545, June.
    7. Gülbanu Kaptan & Arnout R.H. Fischer & Lynn J. Frewer, 2018. "Extrapolating understanding of food risk perceptions to emerging food safety cases," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(8), pages 996-1018, August.
    8. Fumie Yokota & Kimberly M. Thompson, 2004. "Value of Information Analysis in Environmental Health Risk Management Decisions: Past, Present, and Future," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(3), pages 635-650, June.
    9. Avner Engel & Miryam Barad, 2003. "A methodology for modeling VVT risks and costs," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(3), pages 135-151.
    10. Sara S. Nozadi & Li Li & Li Luo & Debra MacKenzie & Esther Erdei & Ruofei Du & Carolyn W. Roman & Joseph Hoover & Elena O’Donald & Courtney Burnette & Johnnye Lewis, 2021. "Prenatal Metal Exposures and Infants’ Developmental Outcomes in a Navajo Population," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-24, December.
    11. Roxane Foulser‐Piggott & Gary Bowman & Martin Hughes, 2020. "A Framework for Understanding Uncertainty in Seismic Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(1), pages 169-182, January.
    12. Richard A. Williams & Kimberly M. Thompson, 2004. "Integrated Analysis: Combining Risk and Economic Assessments While Preserving the Separation of Powers," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(6), pages 1613-1623, December.
    13. Haran, Uriel & Mazar, Asaf & Hurwitz, Mordechai & Moran, Simone, 2022. "Confidently at your service: Advisors alter their stated confidence to be helpful," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    14. Raquel Sanchis & Alfonso Duran-Heras & Raul Poler, 2020. "Optimising the Preparedness Capacity of Enterprise Resilience Using Mathematical Programming," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-29, September.
    15. Cunha, Flávio & Elo, Irma & Culhane, Jennifer, 2022. "Maternal subjective expectations about the technology of skill formation predict investments in children one year later," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 231(1), pages 3-32.
    16. Isaac M. Lipkus, 2007. "Numeric, Verbal, and Visual Formats of Conveying Health Risks: Suggested Best Practices and Future Recommendations," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 27(5), pages 696-713, September.
    17. David M. Hassenzahl, 2006. "Implications of Excessive Precision for Risk Comparisons: Lessons from the Past Four Decades," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(1), pages 265-276, February.
    18. Jakob D. Jensen & Manusheela Pokharel & Courtney L. Scherr & Andy J. King & Natasha Brown & Christina Jones, 2017. "Communicating Uncertain Science to the Public: How Amount and Source of Uncertainty Impact Fatalism, Backlash, and Overload," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(1), pages 40-51, January.
    19. Peter M. Wiedemann & Andrea T. Thalmann & Markus A. Grutsch & Holger Schütz, 2006. "The Impacts of Precautionary Measures and the Disclosure of Scientific Uncertainty on EMF Risk Perception and Trust," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(4), pages 361-372, June.
    20. Huizingh, Eelko K. R. E. & Vrolijk, Hans C. J., 1997. "A Comparison of Verbal and Numerical Judgments in the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 237-247, June.
    21. Li, Linjun & Lu, Hongfang & Campbell, Daniel E. & Ren, Hai, 2011. "Methods for estimating the uncertainty in emergy table-form models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(15), pages 2615-2622.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:39:y:2019:i:2:p:426-438. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.