Hi,
I need a description; of which formula to be used to calculate sample-wise human health risk assessment (HHRA) of non-carcinogenic groundwater contaminants? However, normally I have seen two kinds of formulas to be used one is an older version and another one is shortened or updated version. So, in that regard, I am a little bit confused; which formula should be suitable to calculate non-carcinogenic (HHRA) or is there any specific condition to use each of them?
In this day of modern tools and computers, why not just calculate both. If there is disagreement with the results, then you need to know which one to trust, or what circumstance is best for each. But there is alot of prework it seems to address risk.
https://www.epa.gov/risk/conducting-human-health-risk-assessment
(PDF) Bioassessment of Heavy Metals in Wheat Crop from Soil and Dust in a Coal Mining Area (researchgate.net)
You may follow this article for more details of HHRA.
Potential non-carcinogenic risks for exposure to contaminants are assessed by comparison of the calculated contaminant exposures with respect to each exposure route and the reference dose (RfD) so as to produce the hazard quotient (HQ). The toxic risk due to potentially hazardous substances in the same environmental media is presumed to be additive and the arithmetic sum of individual target hazard quotient and is equal to the hazard index (HI). To estimate the overall potential for non-carcinogenic effects posed by potentially hazardous substances, the computed HQs for each element are integrated and expressed as a hazard index (HI). The metal pollution index is then, defined by HQ/HI. According to the USEPA (1989) where, HQ/HI < 1, there is no concern for potential human health risks caused by exposure to non-carcinogenic elements and where, HQ/HI >1, there may be a concern for potential human health risks caused by
exposure to non-carcinogenic elements.
You may refer to the publication below:
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Counseling Psychology
- Confusion