Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
EFFECTS WORKING GROUP Tom Hinton; IRSN; France BROAD OBJECTIVES • Dose – Effect Modelling to assist Risk Assessments • Mathematical Derivation of Screening Level Values / Protection Thresholds • Reach Consensus; Document Methods; Publish Guidance EFFECTS GROUP Active Participants Australia 1 Belgium 2 Canada 2 France 3 Germany 1 Japan 2 Netherlands 1 Norway 1 Russia 2 Spain 1 Sweden 3 UK 2 21 EFFECTS GROUP Outline of Working Plan 1) UPDATE Dose-Effect DATABASE (11; A. Real; Spain; July ‘09) ( UNSCEAR; post 2006; Russian/Ukrainian) 2) DOSE – RESPONSE Relationships (13; J. G-L; IRSN; July ’11; PROTECT) Species Sensitivity Distributions (acute vs chronic; field- vs lab-derived; at various taxonomic levels) 3) Incorporate POPULATION MODELS (9; T. Sazykina; Russia; Jan. ‘11) (Review existing models; life history data; data analyses) 4) Alternative Approaches (9; T. Sazykina; Russia; Jan. ’11; ICRP comm. 5) (will non-parametric and Bayesian methods produce screening levels similar to SSD?) EFFECTS GROUP Outline of Working Plan 5) Multiples Stressors (13; H. Vandenhove; Belgium; Dec. ’10; IUR) (Review literature; chemical industry; report on applicability to IAEA; collaborative exp.) 6) Canadian Benthic Data (4; S. Mihok; Canada; July ‘09) (Uranium mining; derive dose to benthos; multivariate stats) 7) Develop and Publish Guidance Documents (21; T. Hinton; France; July. ‘11) (Documentation of methods to derive screening levels; guidance on use of screening levels; guidance in conducting effects type research) 8) Final Reports to IAEA (21; T. Hinton; France; Jan. ‘12) EFFECTS GROUP Next Meeting June or July of 2009; Monaco or Vienna; with BIOTA Working Group