Final Program - Society for Risk Analysis

More documents

Recommendations

Info

1:30-3:00 PMBallroom C1W3-A CommunicatingRisks in Times of DuressChair: Andrew Binder1:30 pm W3-A.1Relationship between judgments ofhealth risk and satisfaction with hazardand exposure communicationsDiebol JK, Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Ross PT,Turkelson A, Weber I, Franzblau A,Parker EUniversity of Michigan, The University ofIowa1:50 pm W3-A.2A strategic risk communication processfor biosolids professionals: advancingthe fieldEggers SL, Thorne SL, Sousa KAT,Butte G, Ackerlund S*Decision Partners2:10 pm W3-A.3Social and psychological elements ofhurricane risk perceptionTrumbo CW, Peek L, Lueck M, MarlattHM, McNoldy B, Gruntfest EColorado State University2:30 pm W3-A.4Same test, same result - same information?A study of physician and layunderstanding of medical tests andriskAustin LCCopenhagen Business School1:30-3:00 PMBallroom C2W3-B FoodborneExposuresSponsored by: MRASGChair: Anthony Fristachi1:30 pm W3-B.1Exposure assessment for caffeine inthe United StatesDiNovi M, Srinivasan J, SrinivasanUS Food and Drug Administration1:50 pm W3-B.2Foodborne contamination consequencemodelingLuedeke JD, Buchta DB, Truong C,Hawkins BE, Cox J, McGarvey D, WhitmireMBattelle Memorial Institute, DHS CSAC2:10 pm W3-B.4Estimation of human infection risksfor foodborne viruses due to consumptionof fresh produce, pork andmussels in EuropeBouwknegt M, Verhaelen K, Rutjes SA,De Roda Husman AMNational Institute for Public Health andThe EnvironmentWednesday1:30-3:00 PMBallroom C3W3-C Symposium: GraphicDepictions of ToxicologicalDataSponsored by: DRSGCo-Chairs: George Woodall, A Boyle1:30 pm W3-C.1Exposure response array project andsummary of an October workshopWoodall GMUS Environmental Protection Agency,NCEA1:50 pm W3-C.2Software for displaying toxicologicaldata at NTP: the Exposure ResponseArray and Forest Plot Viewer programsRooney AA, Boyles AL, Harris SF,Thayer KAOffice of Health Assessment and Translation,SRA International, Inc.2:10 pm W3-C.3Development of ATSDR’s levels ofsignificant exposure tables and figuresAbadin HGATSDR2:30 pm W3-C.4Weight of evidence evaluation foradverse health effects of several pesticidesat environmentally-relevantconcentrationsvon Stackelberg KEE Risk Sciences, LLP1:30-3:00 PMRoom 6W3-D Ecological RiskAssessmentSponsored by: ERASGChair: Greg McDermott1:30 pm W3-D.1Risk screening assessments at LosAlamos National Laboratory (Part 2.Ecological)Fristachi A, Mirenda REnvironmental Risk Resources, Los AlamosNational Laboratory1:50 pm W3-D.2Can soil bioassays be used to establishor modify site-specific cleanup goals?Swanson WL, Ryti RTNeptune and Company, Inc.2:10 pm W3-D.3Water pollution risk associated withnatural gas extraction from the MarcellusshaleRozell DJ, Reaven SStony Brook University2:30 pm W3-D.4Differential body burdens of variouscompounds in co-occurring bivalvesCura J, Occhialini J, Vorhees DWoods Hole Group, Alpha Analytical,The Science Collaborative, North Shore1:30-3:00 PMRoom 7W3-E Symposium:Innovative Means of DataCollection to Support aQuantitative RiskAssessmentChair: Marie Cornu1:30 pm W3-E.1Site visits: a novel means of filling-inthe data gapsFanaselle WL, Dennis S, Oryang D,Pouillot R, Van Doren JFood and Drug Administration, Center forFood Safety and Nutrition1:50 pm W3-E.2Geospatial risk assessment of contaminationof agricultural produce byenteric pathogensAnyamba A, Smith M, Oryang D, FanaselleWNASA Goddard Space Flight Center2:10 pm W3-E.3Collecting data to assess food exposure:comparison of a 4-year project(L. monocytogenes in smoked salmon)versus a real-time assessment afterFukushima Accident (radiologicalhazards)Simon-Cornu M, Beaufort A, Gonze MA,Metivier JM, Mourlon C, Parache VANSES, France, Institut de Radioprotectionet de Surete Nucleaire (IRSN), France2:30 pm W3-E.4Global burden of disease caused byfoodborne toxins: use of biomarkersvs. dietary recall and market samplesWu F, Liu Y, Khlangwiset PUniversity of Pittsburgh36
Page 4 and 5: Ballroom C1Monday10:30 AM-NoonM2-A
Page 9 and 10: US Environmental Protection Agency
Page 11 and 12: Workshops - Sunday, December 4Full
Page 13 and 14: WK9: Eliciting Judgments to Inform
Page 15 and 16: These freely available tools apply
Page 17 and 18: Plenary SessionsAll Plenary Session
Page 19 and 20: 10:30 AM-NoonRoom 8/9M2-F Panel Dis
Page 21 and 22: 1:30-3:00 PMRoom 8/9M3-F Symposium:
Page 23 and 24: 4:50 pm M4-E.5Modeling of landscape
Page 25 and 26: P.35 Health risk assessment of meta
Page 27 and 28: Works-In-ProgressP.99 Assessing the
Page 29 and 30: 10:30 AM-NoonRoom 8/9T2-F Error in
Page 31 and 32: 1:30-3:00 PMRoom 8/9T3-F AppliedMet
Page 34 and 35: 8:30-10:00 AMBallroom C1W1-A Sympos
Page 36 and 37: 10:30 AM-NoonBallroom C1W2-A Commun
Page 40 and 41: 3:30-4:30 PMBallroom C1W4-A Communi
Page 42 and 43: SYMPOSIA DESCRIPTIONSDisclaimer: Al
Page 44 and 45: M3-E Symposium: Listeria Monocytoge
Page 46 and 47: years. Some of the most prominent e
Page 48 and 49: workshop, held in May 2011, additio
Page 50 and 51: how risk assessment can be used to
Page 52 and 53: other novel approach is the use of
Page 54 and 55: W3-C.3 Abadin HG; hga0@cdc.govATSDR
Page 56: ution of values with associated pro
Page 59 and 60: model framework is built on the cor
Page 61 and 62: with a combination of arcs (section
Page 63 and 64: W1-C.3 Belzer RB; belzer@regulatory
Page 65 and 66: M3-A.4 Binder AR, Scheufele DA, Bro
Page 67: W3-B.4 Bouwknegt M, Verhaelen K, Ru
Page 70 and 71: P.92 Bronfman NC, Jiménez RB, Blá
Page 72 and 73: vancing the Next Generation of Risk
Page 74 and 75: choice experiment questionnaire to
Page 76 and 77: mitigations: 1) fruit is coming fro
Page 78 and 79: mortality or systemic infections us
Page 80 and 81: P.90 Clarke CE; cec54@cornell.eduCo
Page 82 and 83: tize information needs. A meta-anal
Page 84 and 85: P.15 Cox J, McGarvey D, Whitmire M,
Page 86 and 87: However the concept of framing is m
Page 88 and 89:
policy implementation. Determining
Page 90 and 91:
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad
Page 92 and 93:
any point in the food chain. The fi
Page 94 and 95:
ogy capable of quant ifying ecologi
Page 96 and 97:
separately, and asked to write down
Page 98 and 99:
derstand benefits and problems with
Page 100 and 101:
defaults, cumulative risk assessmen
Page 102 and 103:
conclusions that are robust in both
Page 104 and 105:
kind (almost always, similar to the
Page 106 and 107:
W2-F.4 Gerst MD, Wang P, Roventini
Page 108 and 109:
stochastic game, players coordinate
Page 110 and 111:
of the short-term climate impacts o
Page 112 and 113:
are being used to collect real time
Page 114 and 115:
W1-F.1 Hamilton M, Lambert J, Linko
Page 116 and 117:
point uncertainty factors with dist
Page 118 and 119:
W4-H.3 Heatwole NT, Florig HK; heat
Page 120 and 121:
These fourteen pathogens account fo
Page 122 and 123:
T2-H.2 Huang Y, Haas CN, Rose JB, B
Page 124 and 125:
cal fields developed from meteorolo
Page 126 and 127:
concentration (Ea/C) among climate
Page 128 and 129:
educated, being female rather think
Page 130 and 131:
Dawley rat and human), 2) the metab
Page 132 and 133:
M3-F.4 Kovacs D, Thorne S, Butte G,
Page 134 and 135:
T2-A.4 L’Orange Seigo S, Wallquis
Page 136 and 137:
W2-H.1 Lazo JK, Morrow BH, Rhome JR
Page 138 and 139:
meet existing and futuristic challe
Page 140 and 141:
health consequences of an intention
Page 142 and 143:
feasibility of comparing nano-enabl
Page 144 and 145:
sion Program studies in New York Ci
Page 146 and 147:
passenger impact of such events and
Page 148 and 149:
W2-I.3 Mitchell A, Casman E; austin
Page 150 and 151:
T3-H.2 Montello BM, Shroy BC, Bucht
Page 152 and 153:
methods used by FDA and EPA to eval
Page 154 and 155:
organizations, sectors, and the Nat
Page 156 and 157:
AoA, from project development to im
Page 158 and 159:
this concept has begun to be operat
Page 160 and 161:
ducted with emergency health respon
Page 162 and 163:
complexity of the problem formulati
Page 164 and 165:
ing the potential carcinogenicity o
Page 166 and 167:
P.125 Ridley CE, Frederick RJ*; fre
Page 168 and 169:
M3-C.4 Roy CJ; croy@tulane.eduTulan
Page 170 and 171:
W4-C.5 Sass J; jsass@nrdc.orgNatura
Page 172 and 173:
significant risk reduction (with do
Page 174 and 175:
this paper, we develop a novel mode
Page 176 and 177:
tion, respectively. Therefore, the
Page 178 and 179:
T4-F.2 Smith MC, Rocks SA, Pollard
Page 180 and 181:
isks are severely miscalculated by
Page 182 and 183:
systems against possible terrorist
Page 184 and 185:
BMEGs may take years to achieve, bu
Page 186 and 187:
American epidemic since 2003, and t
Page 188 and 189:
proaches and those needed for a rel
Page 190 and 191:
W3-G.1 Walderhaug MO, Mitkus R, Hes
Page 192 and 193:
W2-B.5 Wambaugh JF; Wambaugh.John@e
Page 194 and 195:
four cases of multiple myeloma were
Page 196 and 197:
non-state actors to race to deploy
Page 198 and 199:
W2-I.1 Woodard JD, Pavlista AD, Sch
Page 200 and 201:
verbal decision analysis to classif
Page 202 and 203:
Generic Exposure Scenario library.
Page 204 and 205:
M3-A.3 Zingg A, Siegrist M; alexand
Page 206 and 207:
Cogliano V.........................
Page 208 and 209:
Lazo JK............................
Page 210 and 211:
Thrasher JF........................
Page 212:
Thanks for coming!See you next year
show all

Final Program - Society for Risk Analysis

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?