ABSTRACT
I.INTRODUCTION588 II.WHATRISKASSESSMENTISNOT588
A.HazardEvaluation595 B.ExposureAsse s s ment597 c.RiskEstimation599 D.FinalRiskAssessment601
VIII.EXTENSIONOFCARCINOGENESISRISKASSESSMENT METHODSTOOTHERTOXICAGENTS601
588Rodricks
Itappearsthatthescientific,regulatory,business,andconsumerist communitiesremainsharplydividedontheissueofriskassessment anditsroleinregulatorydecisionmaking.Criticsmaintainthatrisk assessmentcannotpossiblyfulfillthepromisesmadeonitsbehalf,and thatitsscientificunderpinningsareeitherabsentorextremelyfragile. Theyalsoholdthatcurrentlyusedmethodsofriskassessmentalmost certainlymisrepresentthetruthaboutrisk.Thedirectioninwhich currentmethodologiesaresaidtoerroftendependsontheinterestsof thecritic:Consumeristsandenvironmentalistsfindthatrisksare routinelyunderestimated,whilethosewhoseproductsmaybeadversely affectedfindthatriskprojectionsareuniformlytoohigh.Although advocatesoftheuseofriskassessmentareusuallycautiousabout notingtheuncertaintiesassociatedwithcurrentmethodologies,they tendtoforgetorignoretheseuncertaintieswhenusingtheassessments fordecisionmaking.Asaresult,thecriticsofriskassessmentfind additionalsupportfortheirskepticism.
