RISK 21: an innovative approach for human risk assessment and its application in occupational exposure to plant protection products in viticulture

Authors

  • Luca Tosti Dipartimento di Scienze Biomediche e Cliniche, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milano
  • Angelo Moretto Dipartimento di Scienze Cardio-Toraco-Vascolari e Sanità Pubblica Università degli Studi di Padova
  • Francesca Metruccio ICPS-International Centre for Pesticides and Health Risk Prevention, ASST Fatebenefratelli Sacco, Milano

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36125/ijoehy.v13i4.466

Keywords:

RISK21, Risk assessment, occupational exposure, agriculture worker, agrochemicals

Abstract

RISK21 (Risk Assessment in the 21st Century, www.risk21.org) [Pastoor, T.P. et al. 2014] is an initiative developed by the Health and Environmental Sciences Institute (HESI) aimed at proposing a transparent and efficient scientific approach for the assessment of human risk deriving from exposure to chemical compounds.

A case study is presented to illustrate the usefulness of this tool applied to the regulatory framework of the pre-marketing tiered approach risk assessment of agricultural workers exposed to plant protection products (PPPs) residues in viticulture.

A risk assessment of eleven pesticides among fungicides, insecticides and herbicides was conducted with a step wise approach starting with default exposure and toxicity assumptions followed by a second evalution for which more specific exposure determinants, and toxicity information were used.  Worker exposure values to pesticides residues were estimated using the recently updated EU harmonized deterministic model (OPEX) and following the general principles for professional agricultural workers risk assessment outlined in European Food safety Authority guidance (EFSA 2022).  The results of the illustrated case study showed that the application of RISK21 could result in a very useful tool for prioritization of actions; moreover its flexibility facilitate decision making on which exposure/toxicity information is deemed necessary to grant a safe use of PPPs.

References

Anne Alix, Jos Boesten, Claudia Bolognesi, Theo Brock, Ettore Capri, Anthony Hardy, Andy Hart, Karen, Annette Ildico Hirsch-Ernst, Susanne Hougaard-Bennekou, Robert Luttik, Angelo Moretto, Bernadette Ossendorp, Ton van Petersen, Yolanda Pico, Andreas Schäffer, Jose Paulo Sousa, Walter Steurbaut, Anita Stromberg, Maria Tasheva, and Der Linden and Christiane Vleminckx, 2010. ‘Scientific Opinion on Preparation of a Guidance Document on Pesticide Exposure Assessment for Workers, Operators, Bystanders and Residents’. EFSA Journal 8(2). http://doi.wiley.com/10.2903/j.efsa.2010.1501 (October 19, 2018).

Buist, Harrie et al., 2017. ‘Guidance on Dermal Absorption’. EFSA Journal 15(6).

Charistou, Agathi et al., 2022. ‘Guidance on the Assessment of Exposure of Operators, Workers, Residents and Bystanders in Risk Assessment of Plant Protection Products’. EFSA Journal 20(1). http://doi.wiley.com/10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7032 (January 10, 2023).

EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2008. ‘Conclusion Regarding the Peer Review of the Pesticide Risk Assessment of the Active Substance Cymoxanil’. EFSA Journal 6(10).

EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2011. ‘Conclusion on the Peer Review of the Pesticide Risk Assessment of the Active Substance Difenoconazole’. EFSA Journal 9(1): 1967. http://doi.wiley.com/10.2903/j.efsa.2011.1967 (January 17, 2023).

EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2013. ‘Conclusion on the Peer Review of the Pesticide Risk Assessment of the Active Substance Spinetoram’. EFSA Journal 11(5). http://doi.wiley.com/10.2903/j.efsa.2013.3220 (January 17, 2023).

EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2014. ‘Conclusion on the Peer Review of the Pesticide Risk Assessment of the Active Substance Lambda-Cyhalothrin’. EFSA Journal 12(5).

EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2015a. ‘Conclusion on the Peer Review of the Pesticide Risk Assessment of the Active Substance Glyphosate’. EFSA Journal 13(11).

EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2015b. ‘Conclusion on the Peer Review of the Pesticide Risk Assessment of the Active Substance Pyraflufen-Ethyl’. EFSA Journal 13(2).

EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2016. ‘Peer Review of the Pesticide Risk Assessment of the Active Substance Acetamiprid’. EFSA Journal 14(11). http://doi.wiley.com/10.2903/j.efsa.2016.4610 (January 17, 2023).

EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2018a. ‘Peer Review of the Pesticide Risk Assessment of the Active Substance Azadirachtin (Margosa Extract)’. EFSA Journal 16(9).

EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2018b. ‘Peer Review of the Pesticide Risk Assessment of the Active Substance Copper Compounds Copper(I), Copper(II) Variants Namely Copper Hydroxide, Copper Oxychloride, Tribasic Copper Sulfate, Copper(I) Oxide, Bordeaux Mixture’. EFSA Journal 16(1): e05152. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5152 (January 17, 2023).

EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2018c. ‘Peer Review of the Pesticide Risk Assessment of the Active Substance Spinosad’. EFSA Journal 16(5).

EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2020. ‘Peer Review of the Pesticide Risk Assessment of the Active Substance Mancozeb’.

EFSA Journal 18(12): e05755. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.2903/j.efsa.2020.5755 (January 17, 2023).

Embry, Michelle R. et al., 2014. ‘Risk Assessment in the 21st Century: Roadmap and Matrix’. Critical reviews in toxicology 44 Suppl 3(SUPPL.3): 6–16. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25070414/ (January 10, 2023).

‘EU Pesticides Database - Active Substances - Boscalid’. https://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/pesticides/eu-pesticides-database/start/screen/active-substances/details/472 (January 17, 2023).

‘EU Pesticides Database - Active Substances - Pyraclostrobin’. https://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/pesticides/eu-pesticides-database/start/screen/active-substances/details/1219 (January 17, 2023).

European Food, Safety and Authority. 2014. ‘Guidance on the Assessment of Exposure of Operators, Workers, Residents and Bystanders in Risk Assessment for Plant Protection Products; Guidance on the Assessment of Exposure of Operators, Workers, Residents and Bystanders in Risk Assessment for Plant Pr’. EFSA Journal 12(10): 3874. https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.2903/j.efsa.2014.3874 (October 19, 2018).

Hemmen, JJ van, G Chester, … P Hamey - Report of the re-entry, and undefined 2002. ‘Post-Application Exposure of Workers to Pesticides in Agriculture’. repository.tudelft.nl. https://repository.tudelft.nl/islandora/object/uuid:10f3b4c3-a0d3-4079-a0b9-226c2ad6c038/datastream/URL/download (January 17, 2023).

Pastoor, Timothy P. et al., 2014. ‘A 21st Century Roadmap for Human Health Risk Assessment’. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/10408444.2014.931923 44(SUPPL.3): 1–5. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3109/10408444.2014.931923 (January 10, 2023).

US EPA (U. S. Environmental Protection Agency), 2000. Agricultural Transfer Coefficients. Policy No. 003.1. Washington, D.C.

Downloads

Published

2023-11-12

Issue

Section

Papers