|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
International Conference on Environmental
Epidemiology & Exposure
2 > 6 September 2006, la Villette
Conference Centre, Paris
PCW1 - Odour and toxicity: measurements, relation, exposure
PCW4 - Separation of uncertainty and variability in NORMTOX
PCW5 - Objective measurement of pulmonary health effects of environmental exposures
PCW6 - Climate Variability, Climate Change and Health
PCW7 - Prioritisation and Precaution in design of Human and Ecological Risk Assessment methodology
PCW8 - Exposure assessment for environmental chemicals using biomonitoring
PCW9 - Introduction to Models and Modeling - Science for Estimating Worker and Consumer Exposures
PCW10 - Dermal exposure and percutaneous absorption: an integrated approach
PCW13 - Implementing a Coordinative Unified Biothreat Intervention and Treatment plan
PCW14 - The ECNIS* Network of Excellence on the road to research excellence and integration
PCS2 - New Researchers Network
PCS3 - Environmental issues in the East Asia ISEE Chapter region
PCS11 - INTARESE: Integrated risk assessment of health effects of environmental exposures
PCW1 - Odour and toxicity: measurements, relation, exposure
Saturday 02/09 - Half day PM (14.00 - 17:00) - Rate: 170€
Lionel Pourtier & Jérôme Boudaud, EOG, Aix-en-Provence, France
SUMMARY
The toxicity problem of odours emitted by an industrial site is often presented by the residents. The general reply explains that odour detection thresholds are much lower than toxicity thresholds (Average Exposure Value, Limit Exposure Value). These values are defined within a specific working environment.
The evaluation of chronic exposure (lifetime exposure) based on the health risk assessment references, also leads to the consideration of the toxicity of odorous molecules in impact studies. Impact on the health of populations is therefore assessed with reference to the Health Reference Levels (VTR/HRL) established from epidemiological studies. Through a set of concrete elements, we will present the indissociable and complementary characteristics of this problem.
In general, the population thinks that bad odours are toxic, which is not necessarily true. If we take hydrogen sulphide for example, it can be beneficial as a thermal cure but may be toxic if perceived between 5 and 250 ppm, and even deadly if smelled beyond 250 ppm (short exposure to concentrations between 500 and 1,000 ppm leads to respiratory paralysis and death). Carbon monoxide however is odourless but deadly beyond 1,000 ppm.
Treatment stations, waste storage and recycling centres, squaring plants, distilleries, spreaders, livestock breeding and chemical plants are the main sources of olfactive nuisance complaints from residents. In reply to these concerns, two approaches may be developed: first, the odour problem (type, source, impact of odours on resident populations and solutions to reduce olfactive emissions) and second, the toxicity aspect of these odorous molecules (exposure time, quantification of exposure levels, risk assessment). The methods and problems covered by these two approaches are complementary and indissociable.
Health risk assessment and odour studies may be developed in five stages:
An olfactive assessment will be conducted at the site through standardized olfactometric measurements. These measurements will indicate the odour level of each of the odorous sources as well as the odour output in order to establish their hierarchy and to determine their contribution to the overall odours at the site.
A physico-chemical diagnosis will be conducted for all the emissions from the site in order to identify the principal molecules emitted into the atmosphere. The type, flow, data on toxicological effects on humans of each chemical compound will determine the risk tracer compounds selected to evaluate their impact on the health of the surrounding populations.
Furthermore, an environmental study of the site will identify its surrounding socio-economic context (other industries, census of populations and their residence area, rural or urban area, etc.).
For odorous molecules, the main route of exposure is through inhalation.
Chemical substances of the odour may have acute effects (due to strong exposure for a short period) and sub-chronic or chronic effects (due to low exposure for a long period). We will also differentiate toxic pollutants with threshold effects (beyond a certain administered dose, there will be an effect produced by this pollutant) and carcinogenic pollutants, also referred to as pollutants without a threshold and for which an effect is produced irrespective of the dose received.
For each selected pollutant, the intrinsic effects on human health, particularly through inhalation, will be examined.
The ratio between the exposure level to odours and pollutants and the incidence and gravity of these effects will be estimated.
Regulatory emission values have been issued concerning the odour output allowed based on the height of the emissions for IPCE, “beyond which discomfort may be felt in the surrounding area” (Decree of 2 February 1998, Article 29 and its Application Circular of 17 December 1998). In particular, for the treatment of cadavers, wastes or by-products of animal origin (Decree of 12 February 2003), “the odour output must comply with the following air quality objectives: the odour concentration calculated within a radius of 3 km from the property limits of the site must not exceed 5 UO/m 3 for more than 175 hours per year for an existing facility”. These reference values for odour levels and the associated olfactive discomfort are based on both the source and the environment.
The law on air (30 December 1996) and its decrees (6 May 1998 and 15 February 2002) recommend that “the air we breath must not be harmful to our health” and define the environmental values for chemical pollutants (air quality objectives). Furthermore, the Health Reference Levels (HRL) available in toxicological databases ( WHO, US EPA, ATSDR, etc.) specific to each pollutant, serve as a reference for exposure limit values for populations residing around the facility. These HRL are established based on an epidemiological study and for a given duration of exposure.
The assessment of the exposure of populations may be conducted for odours and for pollutants through a modelling of atmospheric dispersion. This method allows a determination of foreseeable environmental concentrations of odours or pollutants, their area of impact and establishes the frequency in which the threshold value is exceeded. An example of this map is given below for exposure levels to pollutant X (fictitious case).
Furthermore, physico-chemical measurements may be conducted at different points in the environment in order to verify the consistency of results obtained by modelling or to quantify environmental concentrations if the modelling is not adapted. These will provide an accumulated risk assessment (site + background level).
The impact of odours may also be quantified through the following methods:
The characterization of risks corresponds to a summary of information provided by the assessment of exposures and hazards. It can quantify the probability of occurrence of undesirable effects.
Within the context of odour studies, the odour output at emission and the frequency in which threshold values are exceeded in the environment are compared to the reference values. In addition, the calculation of olfactive comfort indices (stipulated in the Decree of 12 February 2003) allows the drawing up of maps indicating the different areas with the associated comfort indices (good, average, degraded, poor).
Within the context of the health risk assessments, environmental concentrations of pollutants are compared with the Health Reference Levels in order to establish if there is a health risk for the residents.
Based on results obtained, it may be necessary to reduce emissions at the sources both for the odours and pollutants.
The odour studies and health risk assessments are two problems which are:
Aim and objectives
The aim of this conference is to present the existing relation between odour and toxicity. Population close to industrial plants often link, rightly or wrongly, odour and toxicity. To answer this question, a methodology using same tools and the same approach will be developed: source exposure, toxicological reference level, population exposure, risk characterisation. First, the identification and measurement of the different odour sources must be realised with specific samplers. At the same time identification and quantification of the chemicals substances provided by the atmospheric emissions must be conducted. For the route of exposure which is inhalation, the following stage involves in the hazard identification and choice of the guide value such as toxicological reference level. Two sorts of values are available to quantify the odour risk and the toxicity risk: threshold odour value (perception, annoyance), threshold toxicity value (carcinogenic or non carcinogenic values). Each value is associated to toxicological effects. The inhabitants exposure may be assessed by atmospheric dispersion modelling (for odour and chemicals pollutants) or by environmental measurements. The last stage of the methodology proposed is the characterisation of the odour risk (expressed in quality level olfactory) and the health risk (expressed with toxicological levels: hazard index and individual cancer risk).
We will expose through concrete examples the indissociable and complementary character of these problems.
FORMAT and CONTENT
We propose the following course agenda:
PCW4 - Separation of uncertainty and variability in NORMTOX
Saturday 02/09 - Whole day - 9.00 – 17.00 - Rate: 320€
Femke Brouwer, Radboud University Nijmegen, The Netherlands
SUMMARY
Variability and uncertainty are different characteristics of a system. Variability is defined as the temporal, spatial or intersubject differences in the value of a certain parameter. Uncertainty can be thought of as a measure of the incompleteness of one’s knowledge (Cullen & Frey, 1999). Theoretically, uncertainty can be eliminated by gathering more information, in contrast to variability, which is inherent in the system and cannot be eliminated by doing additional research.
This course focusses on the separation of variability and uncertainty in NORMTOX, an integrated human exposure model, which predicts the lifetime averaged daily intake of contaminants (Ragas & Huijbregts, 1998). Without separation of variability and uncertainty, variance in the output values originates from interindividual variation as well as from true uncertainty. This dual origin impedes an unequivocal interpretation of the model outcome. Therefore uncertainty and variability should be separated, so that the output predicts which fraction of the population is at risk and details the probability of this risk. This gives risk managers the opportunity to choose an exposure level having the desired reliability as well as the desired protection level. Uncertainty and interindividual variability in the input data are separated by means of Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) techniques and propagated through the model by second order Monte Carlo simulation.
The training course is conducted in the framework of the integrated project NoMiracle (Novel Methods for Integrated Risk Assessment of Cumulative Stressors in Europe) of the European Sixth Framework Programme ”Global Change and Ecosystems”.
AIMS and OBJECTIVES
Each individual within a population has its own characteristic activity and dietary pattern and its own physiological parameters, which in addition may vary in time. These differences lead to variability in exposure and effect between individuals. Variability can be defined as the temporal, spatial or intersubject differences in the value of a certain parameter. Parameters can also be uncertain, which can be thought of as a measure of the incompleteness of one’s knowledge (Cullen & Frey, 1999). Theoretically, uncertainty can be eliminated by gathering more information, in contrast to variability, which is inherent in the system and cannot be eliminated by doing additional research (Decisioneering, 2000). Variability and uncertainty are, as explained above, two different characteristics of a system. Because variability and uncertainty can have different implications for decision making, it may be useful to consider them separately in an analysis. This course will focus on the separation of variability and uncertainty in NORMTOX. This is an integrated human exposure model. It predicts the lifetime-averaged daily intake of a contaminant and compares it with the acceptable daily intake (Ragas & Huijbregts, 1998). Results are reported as frequency charts, in which variance originates from interindividual variation (e.g. body weight and consumption patterns) and from a lack of knowledge (e.g. the true value of oral or inhalatory absorption fractions). Because this dual origin of the variance impedes an unequivocal interpretation of the model outcome, it should be separated and visualized individually. This separation of interindividual variability and uncertainty can be established by combining ANOVA techniques and a second order Monte Carlo simulation. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) techniques are used to separate different sources of uncertainty in the input files, and to quantify the contribution to the total uncertainty and variability. The influence of true uncertainty in the risk predictions of NORMTOX are separated from the influence of interindividual variability by means of nested Monte Carlo simulation. This technique propagates the different sources of uncertainty through the model. Results can therefore be presented as the population fraction at risk, due to interindividual variability in consumption and activity patterns, and the probability of this risk.
The aim of the course is to transfer theoretical knowledge about uncertainty and variability and to train the practical skills involved. Problems arising when applying the techniques for the separation of uncertainty and variability will be addressed. This course is intended for PhD students from research areas adjoining to exposure assessment, who are interested in these assessments and are willing to learn more about the application of probabilistic risk assessment methods in this field.
FORMAT
To get an insight in the problematic nature of the matter, NORMTOX can be brought as a case study in which the attendants build up the model themselves. To come to solutions for the upcoming problems this case study will be introduced and guided by several lectures in which the requisite techniques are explained. The course is best scheduled during a whole day, which will consist of approximately 2 hours of lectures in total and 6 hours case study with practical skills training. During the case study Crystal Ball and Excel will be utilized, therefore the location must have computers provided with this software or the possibility to install this software.
CONTENT
The course is best scheduled during a whole day, which will consist of approximately 2 hours of lectures in total and 6 hours case study with practical skills training.
AUDIENCE
This course is intended for PhD students from research areas adjoining to exposure assessment, who are interested in these assessments and are willing to learn more about the application of probabilistic risk assessment methods in this field. A maximum of 24 participants is necessary to guarantee optimal guidance for all participants.
REQUIREMENTS
During the case study Crystal Ball and Excel will be utilized, therefore, the location must have computers provided with this software, or the possibility to install this software (Crystal Ball is available on the internet). The case study can be carried out by couples, which brings the required number of computers to 12 with a maximum of 24 participants.
PCW5 - Objective measurement of pulmonary health effects of environmental exposures.
Subtitle: A hands-on workshop for learning about modern spirometry and exhaled nitric oxide tests
Saturday 02/09 - Half-day AM - 4 hours - 8.30 – 12.30 Rate: 170€
Paul Enright, University of Arizona, Tucson, USA
SUMMARY
This hands-on workshop will acquaint the attendees with the most current methods for testing lung function and lower airway eosinophilic inflammation in people exposed to respiratory hazards. Everyone will perform their own spirometry and exhaled nitric oxide (eNO) tests using modern instruments. The types of lung injury that affect spirometry and eNO results, making these tests valuable objective measurements of health outcomes will be presented, with plenty of time for questions.
AIMS
Acquaint the workshop attendees with the most current methods for testing lung function and lower airway eosinophilic inflammation in people exposed to respiratory hazards. Allow the attendees to perform their own spirometry and exhaled nitric oxide (eNO) tests. Dissuss the types of lung injury that affect spirometry and eNO results.
AUDIENCE
Because of the hands-on portion and the number of instruments available (5 of each), there will be a maximum of 25 attendees. Epidemiologists (docs, post-docs, and young scientists) as well as project managers involved in studies of exposure-response to respiratory hazards and technologists who may be asked to perform these health outcome measurements are welcome to attend the workshop. No experience is necessary.
FORMAT
Workshop with presentations and hand-outs in English. The same workshop can be given both in the morning and the afternoon (if the morning workshop becomes filled by applicants). The Power-Point presentations and handouts will be provided to the conference organizers more than 2 weeks before the workshop. The handouts will be the guidelines for these two tests as published by the American Thoracic Society and the European Respiratory Society.
CONTENT
The workshop will alternate between 15-20 minute Power-Point presentations (each followed by 5-10 min Q&A), and 20-25 minute hands-on workshops in small groups (5 or less per table with an instructor).
PCW6 - Climate Variability, Climate Change and Health
Saturday 02/09 - Whole day - 8.30 - 17.00 - Rate: 320€
Dominique Charron, Public Health Agency of Canada, Guelph, Canada - Sari Kovats, LSHTM, London, UK - Kris Ebi, Exponent, Alexandria, USA
SUMMARY, AIMS and OBJECTIVES
To detect and effectively assess the health impacts of climate and climate variability, it is important to recognize the various ways by which climate can affect health. The workshop will involve presentations from leading experts on climate change and health and will focus on the key concepts and epidemiological methods used to quantify the effects of climate variability on infectious diseases, and other health outcomes. The workshop will also address methods for risk assessment in the context of climate change, and the proper use of climate and socio-economic scenarios.
The objective of the workshop is to share expertise with other researchers and to advance scientific understanding on the long-term implication of climate change and variability on health and the challenges in modeling the spatial and temporal associations with climate factors.
AUDIENCE
The workshop will be designed for researchers interested in learning about research and methods on climate change, climate variability and health.
FORMAT and CONTENT
PCW7 - Prioritisation and Precaution in design of Human and Ecological Risk Assessment methodology
Saturday 02/09 - Whole day - 9.00 - 17.00 - Rate: 320€
Peter Sorenson, National Environmental Research Institute, Silkeborg, Denmark
SUMMARY
The selection of an appropriate scenario is a strong challenge in the case of risk evaluation and assessment for environment and human health. A scenario is needed for any risk assessment and is defined by a set of factors that is assumed to have governing influence of the risk including description of the interrelation between those factors. Examples of questions that identify factors are: (1) Which substance is most relevant to included in the risk assessment? (2) What is the most relevant mixture to consider? (3) How to take into account several endpoints in the identification of substances/mixture for risk assessment? And many other questions come up before the risk assessment can take place. The high numbers of factors induces a large number of potential scenarios assessments that exceed any realistic limit of resources available for risk assessment. Some kind of selection procedure is therefore needed in order to focus the risk assessment on the most relevant scenario. However, the challenge for any selection procedure is to avoid selection of sub-optimal scenarios for risk assessment as this will induce hidden uncertainty into the entire risk assessment procedure. In the uncertainty management it is therefore also needed to take into account the risk assessment scenario that defines the circumstances for the risk assessment. Any relevant factor included in the assessment needs, in the ideal case, to be addressed in the scenario selection procedure. The course will be based on a stepwise paradigm that is developed in the EU Sixth Framework Program Priority 1.1.6.3 project NOMIRACLE (Novel Methods for Integrated Risk Assessment of Cumulative Stressors (Contract No. 003956-2)).
The main problem has to be defined risk assessment. This includes focusing the problem and related validity area (what is included and what is not included). The problem formulation is not trivial and often it turns out to be difficult.
The governing factors for risk assessment is used to derive a set of criteria that are considered as essential for the specific risk assessment problem, here a structured criteria definition will be shown and used. A criterion is NOT a data set but a concept like e.g. “Bio accumulation”. In this step it is important not to ignore important factors and expose too much attention to a sub set of criterion and thus induce a bias into the analysis. A conceptual risk assessment scenario is defined by the criteria set. The main problem is sequentially divided up into lower level sub problems, where a solution of all the sub problems at a lower level yields a solution of the main problem. The sub problems become more and more specific going to a lower level and are thus simpler to solve. The lowest level of sub problems are the criteria set for the main problem. A criterion is therefore a sub problem that is not further divided into lower level sub problems.
The criteria are characterized using approximation with data sets. The data background is thus not equivalent to the criteria but instead approximations for the criteria. A criterion may be approximated using model predictions and not necessary by empirical data directly. Thus, a more or less valid data approximation of a criterion will exist. Improvement of the approximation may be subject to future scientific activities if the criterion is judged as crucial for the main problem to be solved. A novel uncertainty analysis can take place, where the uncertainty is divided up to: (1) The uncertainty related to the fact that the data is analogies for the criteria and thus associated with uncertainty due to the approximation. (2) The uncertainty related to the data values in a classic statistical sense.
Problem reduction can take place where sub problems are neglected consciously. Such a reduction can be made due to expert knowledge or simply because of limited resources. The set of criteria that relates to the selected main problem after a reduction may have taken place compose the scenario setup. The data that approximates the criteria forms the data background for the scenarios. Every realistic combination of background data setting represents one single scenario. The number of scenarios to be included for problem solving is thus equal to the number of realistic combinations of background data.
The third step is to relate the single criterion data value to each other in a multi-criteria analysis for selection of scenarios. The problem of conflicting data sets for different criteria will induce uncertainty into the finding of the most relevant scenario. A multi-criterion method based on partial order theory will be described and used. Application of criteria data set in multi-criteria ranking with respect to the identification of the worst case scenario for risk assessment. The main principle in multi-criteria analysis methods will be briefly described. Focus will be on the use of a stochastic principle in the multi-criteria analysis as based on Partial Order Theory paradigm for operational ranking following the concept of linear extension as described in Davey and Priestly, 1990. The approach is made practicably useable by Sørensen et al. 2001, and Lerche et al., 2003 and is now in a stage where it is possible for non-experts in ranking theory to do the application on real problems using the free-ware RangPropData. The application in relation to risk assessment of chemicals is discussed by e.g. Sørensen et al., (2005).
AIM and OBJECTIVES
To improve the scientific background of risk assessment using a scientific driven design of the governing conditions for subsequent detailed risk assessment.
To combine a hieratical concept of criteria definition with a concept of multi-criteria analysis in order to perform a design of the most relevant conditions for more detailed risk assessment.
To get a more complete picture of the uncertainty inherent in the risk assessment
AUDIENCE
Technical staff that performs risk assessment or are is change of evaluating those and research staff that will like to widen the view on uncertainty related to precaution risk assessment. The professional background is general from the area of risk assessment and the calculation principles will be described from basis so no specific mathematical skills is a condition. The course considers a methodological approach and is thus valid for many specific areas of risk assessment problems.
Every participant has to bring a lab-top computer using Windows (installation of a simple exe file will take place).
The participants will be asked before the course to gather data for a "test case" that is a part of their daily activity. This will make the course more directly relevant for the participants. The course will thus be: 2-3 hour of lecturing and about 3 hour of parasitizing using the data gathered individually by the participant. Some data will be available in the "back hand" in case that some participants are missing test data. Training material will be send out two weeks before the course. The soft-ware of multi-criteria analysis (RangProp) will be freely available for the participants after the course including a hot-line for the usage.
CONTENT
PCW8 - Exposure assessment for environmental chemicals using biomonitoring
Saturday 02/09 - Half-day AM - 4 hours - 8.30 – 12.30 - Rate: 170€
Larry Needham, CDC, Atlanta, USA
SUMMARY, AIMS and OBJECTIVES
This program is designed to allow the participant to gain basic information that should be considered when developng methods for biomonitoring or when using biomonitoring for exposure assessment. The program will discuss the advantages and limitations of biomonitoring, the matrices which are commonly used, alternative matrices and medthodologic issues. The program will also address issues for consideration when making measurements at various lifestages, especially fetal and early childhood exposure assessment. The program will feature three case study presentations that will highlight the complexities in measurements and data interpretation. In addition, a presentation on emerging chemicals in biomonitoring will be given. We will also discuss the interpretation of biomonitoring data for various applications, such as epidemiological studies and risk assessment.
AUDIENCE
Those who want to know more about biomonitoring. A laboratory background is not necessary.
FORMAT and CONTENT
PCW9 - Introduction to Models and Modeling - Science for Estimating Worker and Consumer Exposures
Saturday 02/09 - Whole day : 8.30 - 17.00 - Rate: 320€
Michael Jayjock, the LifeLine Group, Langhorne, USA - Susan Arnold, the LifeLine Group, Roswell, USA
SUMMARY
Regulatory programs in Canada and the European Union are placing an increased emphasis on the use of quantitative human health risk assessment to characterize the safety of substances used in the products used in the home and the workplace. These risk assessments will be required to address a large number of chemicals from multiple sources and by various routes of exposures. Monitoring data will be essential but not sufficient to support these risk assessments. The assessments will require generalized constructs estimating exposure (i.e., models) in order to address this significantly expanded universe of exposure assessments. This workshop is designed to present the fundamental concepts involved in this paradigm while introducing the attendee to the basic tools currently available for estimating inhalation and dermal exposure. It is designed to be a general and broad overview of the process useful in both the occupational and consumer exposure settings. It will provide the attendee with an appreciation of the nature and state-of-the-science of modeling while, hopefully, whetting their appetite to learn more about this critical area of exposure assessment science.
OBJECTIVES
After the attendee completes this course he or she should be able to:
AUDIENCE
Pre-requisites include a general interest and curiosity about the topic of modelling exposures to substances in the workplace and the home as part of a human health risk assessment.
FORMAT and CONTENT
Classroom lecture with hands-on working of case studies by attendees.
8:30-9:00am INTRODUCTION
9:00-9:40 GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO MODELING IN THE CONTEXT OF RISK ASSESSMENT
o Risk = f (Exposure)(Toxicity)
o Precautionary Approach (versus The “Precautionary Principle”)
o Risk Management needs Risk Assessment
· Pure Risk Assessment versus Practical Risk Evaluation
· De minimis and “Acceptable” Risk Levels
· Difference Between Occupational And Non-Occupational Standards - impact of this difference on the precision of the Exposure Assessment.
9:40-9:55 BREAK (15min)
9:55-11:00 DETERMINISTIC INHALATION EXPOSURE MODELS
11:00-12:00 DETERMINISTIC DERMAL EXPOSURE MODELS
12:00 –1:00pm LUNCH
1:00-2:15 ESTIMATING SOURCE STRENGTH (Submodling)
2:15- 2:30 BREAK (15 minutes)
2:30-3:30 UNCERTAINTY AND PROBABILISTIC ANALYSIS AND MONTE CARLO SIMULATION
3:30-3:50 Software Demonstration
3:50-4:00 MODELING CASE STUDY CASE 1
4:00-4:30 CASE 2
4:30-4:45 Reports/Discussion by the Groups
4:45-5:00 Summary of Day’s Activity/Workshop Critique
PCW10 - Dermal exposure and percutaneous absorption: an integrated approach
Saturday 02/09 - Half day: 14.00 - 17.00 - Rate: 170€
Michael Dellarco, US EPA, Washington, USA - Joop van Hemmen, TNO, Leiden, The Netherlands - Curtis Dary, US EPA, Las Vegas, USA
SUMMARY, AIMS and OBJECTIVES :
This is a technical workshop not a training session. It seeks to bring experts from around the world together to discuss current and emerging issues about dermal exposure assessment and percutaneous absorption measurement and modelling. It is intended to build on previous workshops convened at X2004, Occupational and Environmental Exposures of Skin to Chemicals-2005, and the EU Global Net Workshop on dermal transfer and penetration algorithms to present viewpoints and exchange information and ideas about current approaches to dermal absorption measurement and modelling, particularly QSAR activities.
It is acknowledged that dermal exposure is the primary pathway of exposure under various circumstances. This situation is particularly true where dermal contact and resultant transfer of residue is a precondition, but also in situations where dermal exposure occurs during the use of products or chemicals. It should be realized that dermal exposure is a complex pathway owing to the sequential nature of events involved in delivering a potential dermal dose. An important step in this process is the human behaviour that involves contact with contaminated or treated surfaces or during application. This results in a dermal dose which, this should be realized, may change in time and is often distributed very heterogeneously over the body. The subsequent step, dermal absorption and disposition, largely depends on the physico-chemical properties of the chemical and the nature of the residue matrix, or in fundamental terms, the vehicle. Over the last decade, a great deal of thought and effort has been expended in modelling dermal absorption using quantitative structure activity relationship (QSAR) methods. Most of these QSARs have been developed to predict permeation coefficients (Kp) and are put forward to be used in risk assessment of chemicals. Realistic exposure conditions, however, most often involve small amounts of products or chemicals (“finite dose”), while the databases on which QSARs have been built typically contain data from very high (“infinite”) doses. There is therefore a need for methodology translating QSAR-derived Kp-values to occupationally relevant (finite) dose scenarios. In addition to their stand-alone use in risk assessment, QSAR predictions have also been relied on as inputs to physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) models. Also in this case, the validity of Kp predictions is critical to the acceptance of the PBPK model output, particularly in this computationally oriented age where modeling is, and will be, increasingly relied upon to make regulatory decisions.
The aim of the workshop is to discuss and formulate recommendations on the development of integrated modeling approaches estimating the internal dose after dermal exposure, to be used for risk assessment of chemicals.
AUDIENCE
This meeting is intended to bring technical experts together to review and discuss QSAR methodology as was done in 2005. 20-30 participants will be invited and others are welcome. Attendees should be actively involved in exposure assessment research or policy making with a particular interest in the dermal pathway.
FORMAT and CONTENT
This is a technical workshop. It follows previous ones held in 2005 at the International Conference on Occupational and Environmental Exposures of Skin in Stockholm Sweden and the Workshop on Dermal Transfer and Penetration Algorithms Global Net on Consumer Exposure Modeling in Verbania/Intra ( Italy). Invited speakers from around the world will present their current perspectives on QSAR methodology for dermal absoprtion. Discussions will be held to identify mutual areas of interest with the aim of formulating recommendations on the development of integrated modeling approaches and estimating the internal dose after dermal exposure to be used for risk assessment of chemicals.
PCW13 - Implementing a Coordinative Unified Biothreat Intervention and Treatment plan
Saturday 02/09 - Whole day: 9.00 - 16.00 - Rate: 320€
Martin Dudziak, GITI, Reston, USA - Dorothy Small, Shaw Group, Virginia Beach, USA - Kirstin Omberg, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, USA
SUMMARY, AIM and OBJECTIVES
The focus is upon high-contagion diseases such as but not limited to avian flu and the methods by which informatics, sensor networks, and self-reporting protocols combine with the use of antimicrobial protection and decontamination and rapid-response PCR-based diagnostics to provide responsive containment and treatment to large, diversified and undefined populations.
To present two particularly interesting results from prototypes currently entering into field testing.
To provide concrete training in methods for designing, integrating and coordinating regional and ad hoc biosensor and intervention (diagnosis, decontamination and treatment) networks (both automated and manually deployed) that target rapid and amorphous spread of infectious diseases in animal and human populations.
Addressed will be practical issues and solutions in administration, planning and interagency policies, organization and technical communications, public reaction and support, and also specific medical and informatics technologies to overcome barriers including infrastructure barriers and/or collapse.
AUDIENCE
The target audience consists of public health, emergency response, epidemic control teams who are responsible for local and regional protection and treatment, as well as first responder emergency team members and administrators of programs at local, state and national levels.
CONTENT
The workshop will address organization, interagency, funding, information technology, logistics and public education issues with specific guidelines and instructions on how to solve problems in each of these domains that have proven to be barriers to many epidemiological and public health initiatives. The organizers and presenters will draw upon specific past learning experiences and also the advantages and powers of certain specific technologies and resources such as rapidly deployable pathogen-specific "swipe" sensors, antimicrobial protectant-decontaminant sprays and coatings, portable and field-lab PCR multiplex pathogen diagnostics, and the intelligent communication agent technology to provide notifications, alerts and disseminated warnings to epidemic responders as well as the public. Within the workshop will be a practicum on the use of portable web-based portals such as Verona and content management resources such as Mambo for managing the flow of critical information from monitoring, responder, and emergency medical units operating within epidemic interventions A demonstration of the use of the portable InCheck lab-on-chip and reader in an emergency response context will be included.
PCW14 - The ECNIS* Network of Excellence on the road to research excellence and integration
Saturday 02/09 - Half day: 9.00 - 12.30 - Rate: 170€
Paolo Vineis, Imperial College, London, UK
SUMMARY, AIM and OBJECTIVES
The purpose of the workshop is to summarize the state-of-the art concerning the validation of biomarkers for inclusion into epidemiological studies on environment and cancer. ECNIS is a Network of Excellence that is energetically addressing several issues, both technological and methodological, for the improvement of “molecular epidemiology”. Much emphasis has been put recently on high-throughput technologies for genetic analyses, but not many people know that similar efforts are now put into the development and validation of high-throughput markers of exposure (DNA adducts, oxidative damage) and intermediate markers (proteomics). A new generation of studies in the field of environmental cancer will soon become possible, and we are sure that many epidemiologists would like to know more...
AUDIENCE
The workshop is addressed to all epidemiologists and environmental scientists interested in knowing more about the last 20 years of research in the field of molecular epidemiology, and in particular to know where we are with the development of biomarkers of exposure and biomarkers of early effect.
PROVISIONAL PROGRAMME
*Environmental Cancer Risk, Nutrition and Individual Susceptibility
Pre-conference seminars
In addition to pre-conference workshops, seminars will be organized on specific topics on Saturday the 2nd of September. Entrance in these seminars is free of charge for registrants to the general conference but only open to a specific audience. Note that because room capacity is limited, prior registration is compulsory. Please register before July 15, 2006.
PCS2 - New Researchers Network
Saturday 02/09 - Half-day PM- 14.00-17.00
Albino Barraza Cuernavaca Mexico - Nelson Gouveia FMUSP São Paulo Brazil- Shakoor Hajat LSHTM London UK- Bénédicte Jacquemin Léonard IMIM Barcelona Spain- Sun-Young Kim University of Washington Seattle, USA - Stephanie von Klot GSF Neuherberg Germany - Anne Knol RIVM Bilthoven The Netherlands - Marie O'Neill University of Michigan Ann Arbor, USA - Sally Picciotto Local Health Authority Roma Italy - Regina Rückerl GSF Neuherberg Germany - Pauline Slotje The Netherlands
SUMMARY
As a group of new researchers we had the idea to build up a network among our peers. The annual conference is a unique opportunity to meet colleagues in our field from around the world and to learn about current results and methodological issues. We believe that the annual conference is an ideal platform for new researchers to communicate about ideas and issues particularly relevant to those in the early stages of their careers. This would create a more lively conference for us as "new" environmental epidemiologists and exposure assessment researchers. Additionally all participants can benefit from new contacts formed in this workshop when they plan new studies, need expertise etc. At the moment we are a group of 11 people from Asia, Europe, Latin America, and the US, and we welcome opportunities to include more international contacts in the spirit of cooperation/collaboration between groups working in different parts of the world.
AIMS and OBJECTIVES
As a way to start networking and sharing experience an integral part of the workshop will be the self-introduction of all participants and the creation of an email list. A few researchers who are a little further along in their career paths (somewhere between “new” and “senior” researchers) will give their views on wise steps with regard to career options and research agenda. Then we would like to start an open discussion among new researchers in environmental epidemiology. We envision discussing research topic areas of special interest as well as how we can contribute better to ISEE/A and how ISEE/A can better serve the needs of people in their early career stages. At present, since this is the first proposed meeting of this group, we do not want to pre-specify topics, but we will prepare a short presentation reviewing the motivation behind this workshop to get the discussion started. Finally we would like to communicate to the wider ISEE/A membership and its leadership the ideas and issues that came out in the discussion amongst the new researchers participating in the workshop.
AUDIENCE
The symposium will be held exclusively for people who define themselves as new researchers: students, postdocs and anyone who considers themself a new researcher (broadly intended as someone who finished their degree less than 10 years ago and is not heading a large research team).
PCS3 - Environmental issues in the East Asia ISEE Chapter region
Saturday 02/09 - Half-day AM - 9.00 – 12.30
How-Ran Guo , National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan
SUMMARY, AIMS and OBJECTIVES
This workshop includes seven papers on various aspects of the associations between the working environment and health. In addition to presenting results of epidemiological studies on the health effects of working environmental exposures, the aims include promoting the communications among epidemiologists, toxicologists, exposure analysts, and other environmental scientists—both are in concordance with the philosophy of ISEE. In particular, this workshop is organized by the newly established East Asia Chapter of ISEE, and therefore it also serves the function of promoting activities of the local chapter and bringing the chapter members together to attend the conference as a group.
FORMAT and CONTENT
Oral presentations including seven papers on various aspects of the associations between the working environment and health.
AUDIENCE
East Asia region: The audience may cover epidemiologists, toxicologists, exposure analysts, and other environmental scientists.
PCS11 - INTARESE: Integrated risk assessment of health effects of environmental exposures
Saturday 02/09 - Whole day: 10.00 - 17.00
David Briggs , Imperial College, London, UK - Erik Lebret , RIVM, Bilthoven, The NEtherlands
AIMS
To discuss how to develop and implement a coherent approach to the integrated assessment of the health risks associated with environmental exposures.
OBJECTIVES
AUDIENCE
Researchers and practitioners in the areas of health risk assessment, environmental epidemiology, exposure assessment and environmental health policy.
FORMAT and CONTENT
Introductory plenary presentations and demonstrations, break-out sessions and plenary feedback/discussion :
© Afsset - 253, avenue Général Leclerc 94701 Maisons Alfort Cedex - France |
Web site : www.afsset.fr |