RESUMO
Pesticide residues were extracted using the QuEChERS method, followed by detection by ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS/MS). The non-carcinogenic health risk in adult and child consumers was calculated by target hazard quotient (THQ) and total target hazard quotient (TTHQ) in the Monte Carlo Simulation (MCS) method. The rank order of pesticides detected by UHPLC-MS/MS based on median concentration in onion was tebuconazole (0.004551 mg/kg) > imidacloprid (0.00233 mg/kg) > boscalid (0.00211 mg/kg) > diazinon (0.00079 mg/kg) > thiabendazole (0.00075 mg/kg) > acetamiprid (0.00052 mg/kg) > thiophanate-methyl (0.00052 mg/kg) > dichlorvos (0.000349 mg/kg) > fenitrothion (0.000132 mg/kg) > penconazole (0.00005 mg/kg). The median of TTHQ in adults and children's consumers were 4.00E-3 and 2.00E-2, respectively. TTHQ in adults and children's consumers was lower than 1 value. Hence, consumers were in the acceptable range (TTHQ <1). Consequently, onion consumption cannot endanger consumers' health status due to the pesticide residues.
RESUMO
Fortification of highly-consumed foods such as bread is an easy and cheap strategy to combat the iron deficiency anemia. However, there have sometimes been some side effects such as iron overload and digestive problems. Accordingly, this study aimed to examine the amount of iron as well as its non-carcinogenic risks in commonly-used types of Iranian flour and breads (Barbary, Lavash, and Tafton) in Isfahan, Iran. Iron concentration of 100 samples of flour and breads were measured by Inductively Coupled Plasma Optical Emission Spectrometer. Moreover, the non-carcinogenic health risk of iron in fortified breads was estimated by Target Hazard Quotient (THQ) in Monte Carlo Simulation technique. The limit of detection (LOD) and limit of quantification (LOQ), with a recovery level of 95%, were 1.8 × 10-5 and 5.9 × 10-5 mg/kg, respectively. The total mean concentration of iron in flour (53.48 ± 22.49 mg/kg) and bread (39.02 ± 22.63 mg/kg) samples was within the standard recommended range (40-85 mg/kg) in Iran. THQ for adults and children was equal to 0.53 and 2.48. respectively. Hence, non-carcinogenic risk of iron through bread consumption was acceptable for adults, while it was not acceptable for children as a sensitive group. Consequently, it is required to rescreen the flour and bread fortification program in Iran according to the comprehensive risk assessment studies.
RESUMO
The health risks (non-carcinogenic and carcinogenic risk) were calculated in both adults and children, using target hazard quotient (THQ) and carcinogenic risk (CR). The concentrations of Cd, Pb, and Ni were higher than the standard limits but they did not pose any non-carcinogenic health risks in adult and children's consumers (THQ <1). Meanwhile, the risk assessment of iAs indicates THQ > 1 for children in Egypt. Moreover, the THQ value due to Me Hg for adult in Tunisia and for children in Tunisia, Malta, Portugal, Latvia, Cambogia, Peru, South Korea, Romania, Hong Kong, United Arab Emirates, Morocco, and Egypt was higher than 1 value. In addition, the calculated CR values of iAs for the adults and children were within the threshold risk of developing cancer (Between 1.00E-4 to 1.00E-6). Therefore, it is recommended to continuously monitor the concentration of PTEs in canned tuna.
RESUMO
The presence of trace elements such as lithium (Li) in water resources in the long term can endanger consumers' health. Several studies have been conducted on Li concentration in water sources; hence, this study attempted to retrieve studies using a systematic search. The search was conducted in Web of Sciences, Embase, PubMed, and Scopus databases from 1 January 2010 to 15 January 2023. Li concentration was meta-analyzed based on the type of water resources and countries subgroups in the random effects model (REM) statistical analysis. In addition, health risk assessment in different age groups was calculated using the target hazard quotient (THQ). This study included 76 papers with 157 data reports in our meta-analysis. The overall pooled concentration of Li was 5.374 (95â¯% CI: 5.261-5.487⯵g/L). The pooled concentration of Li in groundwater (40.407⯵g/L) was 14.53 times surface water (2.785⯵g/L). The highest water Li content was attributed to Mexico (2,209.05⯵g/L), Bolivia (1,444.05⯵g/L), Iraq (1,350⯵g/L), and Argentina (516.39⯵g/L). At the same time, the lowest water Li content was associated with Morocco (1.20⯵g/L), Spain (0.46⯵g/L), and India (0.13⯵g/L). THQ due to Li in water resources in consumers of Iraq, Mexico, South Africa, Afghanistan, Bolivia, Portugal, Malawi, South Korea, Nepal, South Korea, Argentina, and the USA was higher than 1 value. Therefore, continuous monitoring of Li concentration in water sources and reducing Li concentration, especially in groundwater water, using new water treatment processes in these countries are recommended.
RESUMO
The concentrations of toxic elements were analyzed by using Flame Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer (FAAS). Moreover, the human health risk was estimated by Total Target Hazard Quotient (TTHQ) and Cancer Risk (CR) in Monte Carlo Simulation (MCS) technique. The mean concentrations (mg/kg) of Cd (0.08 ± 0.08), Pb (0.23 ± 0.46), and As (0.06 ± 0.04), were in a good compliance with ISO (Iranian standard organization). TTHQ for adults and children was equal to 0.009 and 0.042, respectively and also mean CR in adults and children consumers was equal to 9.73E-7 and 9.08E-7, respectively. Consequently, the concentration of toxic elements (Cd, Pb, and As) in cocoa powder did not pose any safety concerns. Moreover, probabilistic health risk assessment revealed that both adults and children were not at considerable non-carcinogenic (THQ and/or TTHQ ≤ 1) and carcinogenic risk (CR ≤ 1E-6). Even though, seeking for mitigating solutions and applying them to suppress the dangers of food containing toxic elements is a critical subject.
RESUMO
Background: Various studies have used multiple attribute decision making (MADM) techniques to assess and rank health technologies. The goal of the present study was to prioritize health technologies using various techniques of MADMs in combination with decision rules. Methods: The study is an applied research using multi-attribute decision making (MADM) methods. This study extracted the attributes related to health technology assessment from global literature and experts' opinions. In this study, two different types of experts were consulted: the first type, including three experts in the field of the decision-making techniques, on the subject of setting priority on health focusing on MADM; and the second one consists of seven experts in the field of HTA, asked about the selection of attributes and determination their importance. Candidate health technologies were individually weighted and ranked using TOPSIS, SAW and VIKOR by the weight and decision matrix. The results obtained from various techniques were combined and ranked using Copeland's technique to obtain the final ranking of health technologies. To determine HTA type reports, decision rules were defined. All models were designed via MS Excel. Results: This study chose eight technologies according to six tradeoff attributes. These attributes included health benefits at the population level, vulnerable population size, availability of alternative technologies, budget impact, financial protection, and quality of evidence. Their exact weights were 0.25, 0.121, 0.146, 0.132, 0.167 and 0.181, respectively. Also, safety and uncertainty about the cost-effectiveness were considered as the veto and decision rules respectively. Copeland's method was therefore used to combine the methods: Whereas HT2 (The technology for treating patients suffering from varicose) was ranked the highest priority and HT3 (The palliative method for patients who suffer from various cancers) was ranked the lowest (for preventing from any ethical issue, the exact name of each technology wasn't mentioned). Conclusion: Finally, in accordance with decision rules which are based on various conditions of "uncertainty about the cost-effectiveness", it is recommended that full health technology assessment report be performed on three technologies, rapid health technology assessment report be performed on four others, and, finally no prioritizing for health technology assessment be made on one of them.