Browsing by Author "Thomsen, S.T."
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
- Human health risk–benefit assessment of fish and other seafood: a scoping reviewPublication . Thomsen, S.T.; Assunção, Ricardo; Afonso, C.; Boué, G.; Cardoso, C.; Cubadda, F.; Garre, A.; Kruisselbrink, J.; Mantovani, A.; Pitter, J.; Poulsen, M.; Verhagen, H.; Ververis, E.; van der Voet, H.; Watzl, B.; Pires, S.Fish and other seafood are important sources of nutrients, but they are also sources of chemical contaminants that may cause adverse health effects. This article aimed to identify existing risk–benefit assessments (RBA) of fish, shellfish, and other seafood, compare methodologies, discuss differences and commonalities in findings, and identify limitations and ways forward for future studies. We conducted a scoping review of the scientific literature of studies in all languages published from 2000 through April 2019. We identified 106 RBA of fish and other seafood across Europe, Asia, North America, Africa, and at the global level. Studies were heterogeneous in terms of types of fish and other seafood considered, beneficial and adverse compounds assessed, and overall methodology. Collected data showed that a diet consisting of a variety of lean and fatty fish and other seafood is recommended for the overall population and that women of childbearing age and children should limit the consumption of fish and other seafood types that have a high likelihood of contamination. Our review emphasizes the need for evidence-based, up-to-date, and harmonized approaches in RBA in general.
- Risk-benefit in food safety and nutrition - outcome of the 2019 Parma Summer SchoolPublication . Verhagen, H.; Alonso-Andicoberry, C.; Assunção, Ricardo; Cavaliere, F.; Eneroth, H.; Hoekstra, J.; Koulouris, S.; Kouroumalis, A.; Lorenzetti, S.; Mantovani, A.; Menozzi, D.; Naua, M.; Poulsen, M.; Rubert, J.; Siani, A.; Sirot, V.; Spaggiari, G.; Thomsen, S.T.; Trevisan, M.; Cozzini, P.Risk-benefit assessment is the comparison of the risk of a situation to its related benefits, i.e. a comparison of scenarios estimating the overall health impact. The risk–benefit analysis paradigm mirrors the classical risk analysis one: risk–benefit assessment goes hand-in-hand with risk–benefit management and risk–benefit communication. The various health effects associated with food consumption, together with the increasing demand for advice on healthy and safe diets, have led to the development of different research disciplines in food safety and nutrition. In this sense, there is a clear need for a holistic approach, including and comparing all of the relevant health risks and benefits. The risk–benefit assessment of foods is a valuable approach to estimate the overall impact of food on health. It aims to assess together the negative and positive health effects associated with food intake by integrating chemical and microbiological risk assessment with risk and benefit assessment in food safety and nutrition. The 2019 Parma Summer School on risk–benefit in food safety and nutrition had the objective was to provide an opportunity to learn from experts in the field of risk–benefit approach in food safety and nutrition, including theory, case studies, and communication of risk–benefit assessments plus identify challenges for the future. It was evident that whereas tools and approaches have been developed, more and more case studies have been performed which can form an inherent validation of the risk–benefit approach. Executed risk–benefit assessment case studies apply the steps and characteristics developed: a problem formulation (with at least 2 scenarios), a tiered approach until a decision can be made, one common currency to describe both beneficial and adverse effects (DALYs in most instances). It was concluded that risk–benefit assessment in food safety and nutrition is gaining more and more momentum, while also many challenges remain for the future. Risk-benefit is on the verge of really enrolling into the risk assessment and risk analysis paradigm. The interaction between risk–benefit assessors and risk–benefit managers is pivotal in this, as is the interaction with risk–benefit communicators.