what we heard and next steps. the people who made this possible wes long audrey ichida sharon...
TRANSCRIPT
The people who made this The people who made this possiblepossible Wes Long Audrey Ichida Sharon
Thompson Mary Bender Steve Schaub Sherri Dennis Wendy Fineblum
Judy Quigley Mary Grimley Dennis Lang Tanya Roberts Peg Coleman Ann Courtney Angelo Turturro Richard Whiting
Plenary SessionPlenary Session Must increase the size of our toolbox Enhance interactions with economists
who perform Cost-Benefit analyses Need more standardization on how
test-based data is disseminated Need methodological research Improve linkage with epidemiology Potential applications to new types of
problems (e.g., food security, food sufficiency)
Current and Future Dimensions in Current and Future Dimensions in Microbiological Risk Assessment Part Microbiological Risk Assessment Part II
Genomics will be increasingly valuable and will be useful in informing RA
MRA will need to consider the vast diversity that exists in both the pathogen and the host
Genomic methods may help surveillance in complex communities and can help identify new or emerging threats
Interface Between Risk Interface Between Risk Assessors and Risk Assessors and Risk ManagersManagers Respect is critical, no more “us and
them” Functional and physical separation
between RM and RA must be balanced Ongoing interaction provides for more
informed decision making Managers must articulate goals and
questions, and learn about risk assessment
Risk assessors must enhance communication skills
Resources for Risk Resources for Risk AssessorsAssessors Risk assessors have substantial
“bioinformatics” challenges A number of unique data sources
available Epidemiological data (e.g. Japan) Com-Base FAOSTAT NHANES and CSFII
Need for easy access
Modeling (Modelling?) Modeling (Modelling?) Intervention Strategies for Intervention Strategies for Pathogen ControlPathogen Control
Simple models for microbial growth, death and survival may not be “good enough”?
We have a wealth of knowledge that could be used for risk assessments
Need to be able to translate risk assessments into parameters and procedures used in food industry if going to improve public health
Current and Future Dimensions in Current and Future Dimensions in Microbiological Risk Assessment Part Microbiological Risk Assessment Part IIII
Can a standard approach be developed that will cover all microbial types and human subpopulations?
Are current protocols for predicting risk sufficient for decision making?
How much flexibility is needed?
Modeling ChallengesModeling Challenges
Ascertaining the relevance of data sets is very difficult but very important
Need to differentiate variation and uncertainty separate, both technically and for effective communication
Great progress is modeling things that just a few years ago were thought too complex (e.g., cross-contamination)
VirusesViruses
Minimum information on diversity of viral isolates - genetically highly diverse
Methodological limitations Modeling of viral penetration
and infection is not biologically based
Modeling Susceptible Modeling Susceptible PopulationsPopulations Epidemiologic, animal, and in
vitro studies can be integrated to provide a biological basis for risk
Strategic research directed to specific biological phenomena; not just data but mechanisms also
Overall ThemesOverall Themes
Microbial risk assessment is in its infancy
It appears to be a very smart baby
Overall ThemesOverall Themes
Effective communication and interaction critical
Keep focus on the goal, i.e., sound risk-based food safety decisions
Need to embrace a wider range of disciplines and approaches
Balance complexity vs. usefulness (i.e., parsimony)
Openness of participants was outstanding
Next StepsNext Steps
JIFSAN Food Safety Risk Assessment Clearinghouse is a resource for communication that is available to help
Next StepsNext Steps
22ndnd International International ConferenceConference Would it be
worthwhile? How could we
improve it? Where should
we hold it?