Estimating Risks from Exposure to Methylmercury: Application to First Nations People in Canada
Abstract
We combined dose-response analyses with a probabilistic exposure assessment to estimate the risks to native Canadians who ingest methylmercury via fish consumption from natural lakes and a reservoir in British Columbia. Available dose-response data included multivariate measurements of central nervous system functioning in Iraqi children exposed to methylmercury prenatally. We applied the method of principal components to simplify the data structure. The first principal component described close to 80% of the variability in the data, making it a reasonable choice as an index. The relationship between mercury in maternal hair and the probability of an abnormal neurological effects index was modeled with the logistic and Weibull functions. The goodness-of-fit of the two models is discussed and the results compared to other published dose-response analyses. Exposure distributions were developed to represent methylmercury dose by using observed data on methylmercury contamination in the lakes and reservoir and reasonable assumptions about other key parameters such as fish consumption. We estimated risks to the target population using Monte Carlo simulation. Consumption of reasonable quantities of fish from these bodies of water does not pose a significant risk to the aboriginal population.
Keywords
Fish Consumption Weibull Model Probabilistic Risk Assessment Columbia River Basin Methylmercury ConcentrationPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- Bloom, N.S.: 1992, Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 49, 1010–1017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Canadian Environmental Health Directorate: 1993, Reference Values for Canadian Populations, prepared by the Environmental Health Directorate Working Group on Reference Values.Google Scholar
- Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission (CRIFC): 1994, A Fish Consumption Survey of the Umatilla, Nez Perce, Yakama, and Warm Springs Tribes of the Columbia River Basin, report no. 94-3, Portland, Oregon.Google Scholar
- Cox, C., Myers, G., Davidson, P.W., Cernichiari, E., Choi, A., Ping, G., Axtell, C.D., Shamlaye, C., Marsh, D.O., Berlin, M., and Clarkson, T.W.: 1996, The Seychelles Child Development Study: Longitudinal Analysis of Developmental Outcomes from Testing at Six Months, Nineteen Months, and Twenty-Nine Months, presented at Fourth International Conference on Mercury as a Global Pollutant, Hamburg, Germany.Google Scholar
- Cox, C., Clarkson, T.W., Marsh, D.O., Amin-Zaki, L., Tikriti, S. and Myers, G.: 1989, Environ. Res. 49, 318–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Efron, B. and Gong, G.: 1983, Amer. Stat. 37, 36–48.Google Scholar
- Efron, B. and Tibshirani, R.J.: 1993, An Introduction to the Bootstrap, Chapman and Hall, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Fleming, S.W., Radzius, L.V., and Ursitti, F.: 1995, Health Risk Assessment of Mercury Contamination in the Vicinity of ICI Forest Products, Cornwall, Ontario, report no. 95-06312, prepared for Ontario Ministry of Environment and Energy.Google Scholar
- Health and Welfare Canada (HWC): 1993, Mercury Survey-1992: Cheslatta Indian Band and Area Residents, Occupational and Environmental Health Program, Medical Services Branch, Health and Welfare Canada.Google Scholar
- Hilborn, R. and Walters, C.J.: 1992, Quantitative Fisheries Stock Assessment: Choice, Dynamics and Uncertainty, Chapman and Hall, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hopper, M. and Power, G.: 1991., Arctic 44(4), 267–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hosmer, D.W. and Lemeshow, S.: 1989, Applied Logistic Regression, Wiley-Interscience, New York.Google Scholar
- Jackson, T.A.: 1988, Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 45, 97–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kershaw, T.G., Dhahir, P.H., and Clarkson, T.W.: 1980, Arch. Environ. Health 35(1), 28–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kjellstrom, T., Kennedy, P., Wallis, S., Stewart, A., Friberg, L., Lind, B., Wutherspoon, T., and Mantell, C.: 1989, Physical and Mental Development of Children with Prenatal Exposure to Mercury from Fish, Stage 2: Interviews and Psychological Tests at Age 6, Report 3642, National Swedish Environmental Protection Board, Solna, Sweden.Google Scholar
- Lipfert, F.W., Moskowitz, P.D., Fthenakis, V., and Saroff, L.: 1996, Neurotox. 17(1), 197–212.Google Scholar
- Marsh, D.O., Clarkson, T.W., Cox, C., Myers, G.J., Amin-Zaki, L. and Al-Tikriti, S: 1987, Arch. Neurol., 44, 1017–1022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Miettinen, J.K.: 1973, Absorption and elimination of dietary mercury (Hg2+) and methyl mercury in man. In: Miller, M.W. and Clarkson, T.W., ed., Mercury, Mercurials and Mercaptans, C.C. Thomas, Springfield, 233–240.Google Scholar
- Morgan, M.G. and Henrion, M.: 1990, Uncertainty. A Guide to Dealing with Uncertainty in Quantitative Risk and Policy Analysis, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Richardson, G.M. and Currie, D.J.:1993, J. of Exp. Anal. and Environ. Epi. 3(1), 23–38.Google Scholar
- Selvin, S: 1995, Practical Biostatistical Methods, Duxbury Press, London.Google Scholar
- Stata Corporation: 1993, Stata®: Statistics, Graphics and Data Management. College Station, Texas.Google Scholar
- Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd.: 1991, Survey of Mercury Levels in Nechako Reservoir, British Columbia, 1991, prepared for Alcan Smelters & Chemicals Ltd., Vancouver, B.C.Google Scholar
- Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd: 1992, Evaluation of Mercury Concentration in Selected Environmental Receptors in the Williston Lake and Peace River Areas of British Columbia, prepared for Environmental Resources, B.C. Hydro, Vancouver, B.C.Google Scholar
- Weihe, P., Grandjean, P., Debes, F., Sorensen, N., and White, R.F.: 1996, Neurotoxic Potential of Prenatal Exposure to Methylmercury: A Cohort Study in the Faroe Islands, presented at Fourth InternationalGoogle Scholar
- Conference on Mercury as a Global Pollutant, Hamburg, German.Google Scholar
- World Health Organization (WHO): 1990, Environmental Health Criteria 101, Methylmercury, WHO, Geneva.Google Scholar