There are diverse predicaments confronting the performance of risks assessment. Moreover, as stressed by Ramachandran (2011), a high level of uncertainty can make it rather daunting to lessen impacts through prescriptions for safe utilization or through the redesign of materials, products or technologies. Uncertainties may also result to lessened patronage of individuals of certain products since they are hesitant or unsure of the consequences once they employ the use of a certain product or procedure.
Conversely, there are three standard approaches in reducing the likelihood of uncertainties in risk assessment as highlighted by Ramachandran (2011) and these include: data collection, extrapolation and modeling. Adequate and appropriate data generation and collection can aid in coming up with reliable data for risk assessment. Subsequently, data can also be extrapolated from studies done on similar populations to identify standards which are unavailable (Ramachandran, 2011). Finally, employing the use of numerical models may also lessen the probability of uncertainties in risk assessment for they are flexible and can incorporate diverse kinds of information and use subjective expert decision to be able to gauge standards crucial to risk assessment.
Loeber and Farrington (2012) had given emphasis that “considerable variability exists in the way in which risk assessments are designed and reported.” The said variations or differences may transpire first at the origin of the assessment; furthermore, instances of variability may also happen in the utilization of methods in performing risk assessments (Loeber & Farrington, 2012).
After having an overview of the definitions of uncertainty and variability and when it could occur during risk assessment, this paper will then look into “Drinking Water Toxicity Profiles” by the Human Risk Assessment Branch in 1992. In the aforementioned document, ...