食品安全与风险交流

食品安全与风险交流似乎是风马牛不相及的两件事,但在现今＂三聚氰胺奶粉＂、＂血燕窝＂、＂塑化剂＂、＂福喜过期肉＂等一系列重大食品安全事件频繁曝光于公众视野之际,消费者处于不知吃什么、如何吃才是安全的茫然之中,此时,加强风险交流工作则显得尤为重要和必要。＂食品安全问题比天大＂,食品安全是关系人民健康、社会稳定的重要公共安全问题。     

食品安全风险交流工作技术指南

为指导卫生计生系统承担食品安全相关工作一、概念及基本原则的机构和人员科学、有效地开展风险交流工作，制食品安全风险交流，是指各利益相关方就食定本《指南》。品安全风险、风险所涉及的因素和风险认知相互交换信息和意见的过程。食品安全风险交流工作以科学为准绳，以维护公众健康权益为根本出发点，贯穿食品安全工作始终，服务于食品安全工...     

风险认知和风险沟通研究进展

<正>新发传染病、食品安全、自然灾害等相关公共卫生事件的频发对社会安定和经济发展造成了极大影响,如何预防和应对危机事件已经成为世界各国公共卫生体系建设的巨大挑战和主要工作内容。风险沟通和决策也因此成为政府、相关部门和专家研讨的重点课题。     

我国食品安全现状与风险来源：以餐饮业为例

从我国餐饮业食品安全现状出发,以2001—2012年媒体披露的300起餐饮消费食品安全事件为研究样本,利用内容分析法和描述性统计分析法,从食品安全事件的发生地域、发生季节、食品种类、责任主体、发生原因5个方面,对餐饮业食品安全风险来源进行了分析。结果显示：食品安全事件的发生具有一定的区域性、时间性特征,肉制品的质量、个体经营者和人员环境不卫生是主要的风险来源。根据分析结果,提出了加强我国餐饮服务监管能力建设,加大餐饮行业风险关键点监管力度,完善餐饮单位量化分级管理,创新餐饮服务监管模式等政策建议。     

论医疗机构的食品安全风险监测工作

目的通过对医疗机构食品安全风险监测工作的讨论,明确食源性疾病监测是医疗机构在食品安全风险监测中的工作内容,为医疗机构开展食源性疾病监测提供工作借鉴。方法通过文献资料搜集、整理,归纳出医疗机构在食品安全风险监测中的详细工作内容,结合具体工作实际,摸索出医疗机构今后的工作思路。结果食源性疾病监测包括异常病例或者异常健康事件监测、食源性疾病暴发监测、食源性疾病主动监测3方面。结论医疗机构应该建立长效的食品安全风险监测机制,在卫生行政部门的领导下,与疾控中心实现工作互动,信息共享,切实履行食源性疾病监测的工作任务。     

国内外食品安全风险监测发展状况

随着人民生活水平的不断提高,百姓餐桌越来越丰富多样,对食品安全性的关注度越来越高。食品安全是维系社会和谐稳定的重要因素。为了有效预防和化解重大食品安全风险,制定和更新国家食品安全标准,积累和分析食品污染及人群患病相关数据,我国制定并实施最严格的《食品安全法》,在此基础上建立起由政府牵头的食品安全风险监测体系。本文通过国外部分发达国家或国际组织、国内部分省市在食品安全风险监测工作机制的介绍,在信息平台建设、检验检测资源整合、仪器设备投入、专家队伍培养等方面,分析和展望今后食品安全风险监测的发展方向,为百姓筑起一道食品安全的坚固防线。     

国家卫生计生委要求进一步加强食品安全风险监测工作

近日,国家卫生和计划生育委员会印发通知要求进一步加强食品安全风险监测工作。通知要求各省级卫生厅局（卫生计生委）和委直属相关单位切实落实国务院《关于加强食品安全工作的决定》（国发[2012]20号）和《国家食品安全监管体系“十二五”规划》（国办发[2012]36号）的工作部署,进一步加强卫生计生系统食品安全风险监测工作。     

建立四平市餐饮业食品安全诚信评价体系

近年我国食品安全事件频发,食品生产者和经营者唯利是图,诚信缺失,假冒伪劣食品严重威胁了人民群众的身体健康,为切实加强对食品安全的监管工作,切实维护公众身体健康和生命安全,促进社会和谐稳定与协调发展,改善食品安全信用环境,规范餐饮业经营行为和市场秩序,全面提高食品安全水平、健全食品安全综合监管长效机制,我们在食品量化分级管理和餐饮业HACCP基础上,在四平市餐饮行业实行了食品安全信誉评价体系,效果显著,威胁食品安全事件因素大大降低,全面提高了食品安全水平。     

综合应用风险矩阵法与Borda序值法评价区域性大型活动公共卫生突发事件风险

[目的]探讨区域性大型活动公共卫生突发事件风险评价方法,为科学制订公共卫生保障策略提供依据。[方法]以2010年江苏省第17届运动会为研究对象,应用风险矩阵法评价餐饮食品安全事件、公共场所健康危害事件、生活饮用水安全事件、传染病疫情事件和病媒生物引起的公共卫生突发事件5类20种公共卫生突发事件的风险水平;进一步采用Borda序值法对5类20种公共卫生突发事件的风险水平进行排序。[结果]确定了5类20种可能对第17届省运会产生较大影响的公共卫生突发事件的风险水平及其排序,其中餐饮食品安全事件列5类公共卫生突发事件的第1位。细菌性食物中毒列7种餐饮食品安全事件的第1位;游泳池水质污染引起的流行性出血性结膜炎列3种公共场所健康危害事件的第1位;城市集中式供水污染事件、二次供水污染事件并列3种生活饮用水安全事件的第1位;呼吸道传染病列4种传染病疫情事件的第1位;病媒生物叮咬引起皮肤瘙痒、影响正常休息,使人产生烦躁、厌恶情绪列3种病媒生物引起的公共卫生突发事件的第1位。[结论]综合应用风险矩阵法与Borda序值法是评价区域性大型活动公共卫生突发事件风险水平的有效方法,具有推广应用价值。     

国内外食品安全风险预警比较研究

近几年我国食品安全事件频发，造成极大健康危害和经济损失，迫切需要采取有效的管理方式，以有效减少食品安全危害的发生。预警是一种早发现、早警示、早控制的管理方式，已经广泛应用于经济、环境、气象等各个领域，也早已引入食品安全管理中。在食品安全管理中应用预警的原理，就是主动获取食品安全信息，必要时发出预警提示，并及时采取措施以减少危害。包括我国在内的许多国家开展了食品安全预警工作，     

Evaluating health risk tolerance and risk assessment

According to current regulations, major projects are subject to an environmental impact assessment. Within this framework, not only ecological criteria have to be met, but also the possible health impact for the exposed population must assessed. In the absence of limit values for carcinogenic substances in the air, the health impact assessment can be based on quantitative risk assessment. This technology was formerly developed for the assessment of cancer risk imposed by existing environmental exposures, but it is also suitable for the prediction of future exposures and their health consequences. This is demonstrated by using a planned toxic waste incinerator as a model.     

Health risk communication using comparative risk analyses

The ability to communicate effectively the degree or magnitude of public exposures or health risks is essential for risk assessors and risk managers. Various guidelines exist for communicating environmental and public health risks, including recommended approaches for putting risk data into proper context. Although it remains unclear as to which approach is the most useful or appropriate under different circumstances, risk comparisons are a popular choice for conveying the significance of or providing a better perspective on a particular chemical exposure or health risk. In this paper, several different types of risk comparisons are described that are frequently used in the private and public sectors, and these are illustrated using a variety of examples from the literature. These approaches include: (1) intrachemical comparisons, (2) interchemical comparisons, (3) comparisons to background levels of risk, (4) comparisons to theoretical risks or safety levels, and (5) comparisons to other actions or activities. The primary purpose of this paper is to summarize and briefly discuss the advantages and limitations of these risk communication approaches. The evolving field of risk communication is also discussed, including ongoing research on public risk perceptions and alternative methods for communicating risk magnitudes and data uncertainties.     

Enterprise risk management and the healthcare risk manager

The healthcare industry is dynamic and the industry changes require new tools to manage the risks generated by new core competencies. Silo‐centric practice is giving way to integration in the healthcare organization and in the discipline of risk management. Whether insurable or not, risk threatens the bottom line and business success. Enterprise Risk Management provides the tools for imbedding the discussion of Risk into the way an organization does business. Two tools described here are a Showstopper Risks List and a Risk and Response Map. The risk manager who adds value to the organization by aligning risk management strategies in support of business success will not only survive, but thrive in a constantly changing environment.     

Colon cancer: risk perceptions and risk communication

Members of a health maintenance organization (N=353) interacted with a computer program that provided personalized information about their risk of developing colon cancer in the next 20 years. Prior to computer feedback, most people greatly overestimated their numerical, absolute risk (chances per 1000) and also overestimated their relative risk compared to peers (e.g., "above average"). Their relative risk estimates were correlated with several risk factors, whereas their absolute risk estimates were not, suggesting that assessing individual risk perceptions with numerical, absolute risk scales may provide misleading information about what people believe. Computer feedback improved the accuracy of mean risk estimates, but about half of participants did not accept the personalized feedback as correct. In fact, correlations between actual and perceived risk were no greater among participants who received risk scores than among those who did not. Three possible explanations for resistance to lower-than-expected risk feedback are considered.