Research needs for community-based risk assessment: findings from a multi-disciplinary workshop

Fundamentals of wildlife dosimetry and lessons learned from a decade of measuring external dose rates in the field

Methods for determining the radiation dose received by exposed biota require major improvements to reduce uncertainties and increase precision. We share our experiences in attempting to quantify external dose rates to free-ranging wildlife using GPS-coupled dosimetry methods. The manuscript is a primer on fundamental concepts in wildlife dosimetry in which the complexities of quantifying dose rates are highlighted, and lessons learned are presented based on research with wild boar and snakes at Fukushima, wolves at Chornobyl, and reindeer in Norway. GPS-coupled dosimeters produced empirical data to which numerical simulations of external dose using computer software were compared. Our data did not support a standing paradigm in risk analyses: Using averaged soil contaminant levels to model external dose rates conservatively overestimate the dose to individuals within a population. Following this paradigm will likely lead to misguided recommendations for risk management. The GPS-dosimetry data also demonstrated the critical importance of how modeled external dose rates are impacted by the scale at which contaminants are mapped. When contaminant mapping scales are coarse even detailed knowledge about each animal's home range was inadequate to accurately predict external dose rates. Importantly, modeled external dose rates based on a single measurement at a trap site did not correlate to actual dose rates measured on free ranging animals. These findings provide empirical data to support published concerns about inadequate dosimetry in much of the published Chernobyl and Fukushima dose-effects research. Our data indicate that a huge portion of that literature should be challenged, and that improper dosimetry remains a significant source of controversy in radiation dose-effect research.

GPS-coupled contaminant monitors on free-ranging Chernobyl wolves challenge a fundamental assumption in exposure assessments

Measurements of external contaminant exposures on individual wildlife are rare because of difficulties in using contaminant monitors on free-ranging animals. Most wildlife contaminant exposure data are therefore simulated with computer models. Rarely are empirical exposure data available to verify model simulations, or to test fundamental assumptions inherent in exposure assessments. We used GPS-coupled contaminant monitors to quantify external exposures to individual wolves (Canis lupus) living within the Belarus portion of Chernobyl's 30-km exclusion zone. The study provided data on animal location and contaminant exposure every 35 min for 6 months, resulting in ~6600 individual locations and ¹³⁷Cs external exposure readings per wolf, representing the most robust external exposure data published to date on free ranging animals. The data provided information on variation in external exposure for each animal over time, as well as variation in external exposure among the eight wolves across the landscape of Chernobyl. The exposure data were then used to test a fundamental assumption in screening-level risk assessments, espoused in guidance documents of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Department of Energy, - Mean contaminant concentrations conservatively estimate individual external exposures. We tested this assumption by comparing our empirical data to a series of simulations using the ERICA modeling tool. We found that modeled simulations of mean external exposure (10.5 mGy y^-1), based on various measures of central tendency, under-predicted mean exposures measured on five of the eight wolves wearing GPS-contaminant monitors (i.e., 12.3, 26.3, 28.0, 28.8 and 35.7 mGy y^-1). If under-prediction of exposure occurs for some animals, then arguably the use of averaged contaminant concentrations to predict external exposure is not as conservative as proposed by current risk assessment guidance. Thus, a risk assessor's interpretation of simulated exposures in a screening-level risk analysis might be misguided if contaminant concentrations are based on measures of central tendency. We offer three suggestions for risk assessors to consider in order to reduce the probability of underestimating exposure in a screening-level risk assessment.

Integrating multivariate and geostatistical analyses for assessing the socio-environmental vulnerability of children in the vicinity of a contaminated site

Vulnerability assessments are commonly based on complex indices that may be inappropriate for characterizing risks in small groups of people exposed to environmental hazards. The aim was to present a multivariate and geostatistical approach to explore human health risks at the individual, household and community level. First, biological and socioeconomic characteristics from 179 children were used in a cluster analysis to find groups and identify vulnerability profiles. Then, both the exposure of children to arsenic and lead in soils and their accessibility to community resources were assessed using a geospatial analysis. The results identified three vulnerability profiles among children that were not in agreement with the environmental exposure and deficit of community resources. The proposed approach helps optimize strategies to manage both environmental and social risks based on the vulnerability of the exposed population.

Engaging Communities in Research on Cumulative Risk and Social Stress-Environment Interactions: Lessons Learned from EPA's STAR Program

Studies have documented cumulative health effects of chemical and nonchemical exposures, particularly chronic environmental and social stressors. Environmental justice groups have advocated for community participation in research that assesses how these interactions contribute to health disparities experienced by low-income and communities of color. In 2009, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency issued a request for research applications (RFA), "Understanding the Role of Nonchemical Stressors and Developing Analytic Methods for Cumulative Risk Assessments." Seven research projects were funded to help address this knowledge gap. Each engaged with communities in different ways. We describe the community engagement approaches of the seven research projects, which ranged from outreach through shared leadership/participatory. We then assess the experiences of these programs with respect to the community engagement goals of the RFA. We present insights from these community engagement efforts, including how the grants helped to build or enhance the capacity of community organizations in addition to contributing to the research projects. Our analysis of project proposals, annual grantee reports, and participant observation of these seven projects suggests guidelines for the development of future funding mechanisms and for conducting community-engaged research on cumulative risk involving environmental and social stressors including: 1) providing for flexibility in the mode of community engagement; 2) addressing conflict between research timing and engagement needs, 3) developing approaches for communicating about the uniquely sensitive issues of nonchemical stressors and social risks; and 4) encouraging the evaluation of community engagement efforts.

Cumulative risk assessment toolbox: methods and approaches for the practitioner

The historical approach to assessing health risks of environmental chemicals has been to evaluate them one at a time. In fact, we are exposed every day to a wide variety of chemicals and are increasingly aware of potential health implications. Although considerable progress has been made in the science underlying risk assessments for real-world exposures, implementation has lagged because many practitioners are unaware of methods and tools available to support these analyses. To address this issue, the US Environmental Protection Agency developed a toolbox of cumulative risk resources for contaminated sites, as part of a resource document that was published in 2007. This paper highlights information for nearly 80 resources from the toolbox and provides selected updates, with practical notes for cumulative risk applications. Resources are organized according to the main elements of the assessment process: (1) planning, scoping, and problem formulation; (2) environmental fate and transport; (3) exposure analysis extending to human factors; (4) toxicity analysis; and (5) risk and uncertainty characterization, including presentation of results. In addition to providing online access, plans for the toolbox include addressing nonchemical stressors and applications beyond contaminated sites and further strengthening resource accessibility to support evolving analyses for cumulative risk and sustainable communities.

Nutrition can modulate the toxicity of environmental pollutants: implications in risk assessment and human health

BACKGROUND

The paradigm of human risk assessment includes many variables that must be viewed collectively in order to improve human health and prevent chronic disease. The pathology of chronic diseases is complex, however, and may be influenced by exposure to environmental pollutants, a sedentary lifestyle, and poor dietary habits. Much of the emerging evidence suggests that nutrition can modulate the toxicity of environmental pollutants, which may alter human risks associated with toxicant exposures.

OBJECTIVES

In this commentary, we discuss the basis for recommending that nutrition be considered a critical variable in disease outcomes associated with exposure to environmental pollutants, thus establishing the importance of incorporating nutrition within the context of cumulative risk assessment.

DISCUSSION

A convincing body of research indicates that nutrition is a modulator of vulnerability to environmental insults; thus, it is timely to consider nutrition as a vital component of human risk assessment. Nutrition may serve as either an agonist or an antagonist (e.g., high-fat foods or foods rich in antioxidants, respectively) of the health impacts associated with exposure to environmental pollutants. Dietary practices and food choices may help explain the large variability observed in human risk assessment.

CONCLUSION

We recommend that nutrition and dietary practices be incorporated into future environmental research and the development of risk assessment paradigms. Healthful nutrition interventions might be a powerful approach to reduce disease risks associated with many environmental toxic insults and should be considered a variable within the context of cumulative risk assessment and, where appropriate, a potential tool for subsequent risk reduction.

Community-based participatory research in Indian country: improving health through water quality research and awareness

Water has always been held in high respect by the Apsaálooke (Crow) people of Montana. Tribal members questioned the health of the rivers and well water because of visible water quality deterioration and potential connections to illnesses in the community. Community members initiated collaboration among local organizations, the tribe, and academic partners, resulting in genuine community-based participatory research. The article shares what we have learned as tribal members and researchers about working together to examine surface and groundwater contaminants, assess routes of exposure, and use our data to bring about improved health of our people and our waters.