Department of Environmental Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark.
Nanotoxicology. 2012 Mar;6(2):196-212. doi: 10.3109/17435390.2011.569095. Epub 2011 Apr 13.
In response to the challenges of conducting traditional human health and ecological risk assessment for nanomaterials (NM), a number of alternative frameworks have been proposed for NM risk analysis. This paper evaluates various risk analysis frameworks proposed for NM based on a number of criteria. Among other results, most frameworks were found to be flexible for multiple NM, suitable for multiple decision contexts, included life cycle perspectives and precautionary aspects, transparent and able to include qualitative and quantitative data. Nevertheless, most frameworks were primarily applicable to occupational settings with minor environmental considerations, and most have not been thoroughly tested on a wide range of NM. Care should also be taken when selecting the most appropriate risk analysis strategy for a given risk context. Given this, we recommend a multi-faceted approach to assess the environmental risks of NM as well as increased applications and testing of the proposed frameworks for different NM.
针对传统的纳米材料(NM)人体健康和生态风险评估所面临的挑战,已经提出了许多替代框架来进行 NM 风险分析。本文基于一系列标准,对为 NM 风险分析提出的各种风险分析框架进行了评估。除其他结果外,大多数框架被发现对多种 NM 具有灵活性,适用于多种决策情境,包括生命周期观点和预防措施,具有透明性并能够包含定性和定量数据。然而,大多数框架主要适用于职业环境,对环境的考虑较少,并且大多数框架尚未在广泛的 NM 范围内进行彻底测试。在为特定风险情境选择最合适的风险分析策略时也应谨慎。有鉴于此,我们建议采用多方面的方法来评估 NM 的环境风险,并增加对不同 NM 提出的框架的应用和测试。