Difference between revisions of "Benefit-risk assessment of Baltic herring and salmon intake"

From Testiwiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Calculations)
(Calculations: code fixed but has to be double checked)
Line 103: Line 103:
 
This section will have the actual health benefit-risk model (schematically described in the above figure) written with R. The code will utilise all variables listed in the above Dependencies section. Model results are presented as tables and figures when those are available.
 
This section will have the actual health benefit-risk model (schematically described in the above figure) written with R. The code will utilise all variables listed in the above Dependencies section. Model results are presented as tables and figures when those are available.
  
* Model run 22.2.2017 with unknown runtime error [http://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=Special:RTools&id=p8OXmFn57sJdVfkV]
+
* Model run 28.2.2017 [http://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=Special:RTools&id=pvSqXlasQZwgRVlm]
  
 
<rcode name="bayes" label="Run Bayes model" graphics=1>
 
<rcode name="bayes" label="Run Bayes model" graphics=1>
Line 151: Line 151:
 
genderl <- unique(survey$Gender)
 
genderl <- unique(survey$Gender)
  
######## ADDED
 
 
conl <- unique(eu@output$Congener)
 
conl <- unique(eu@output$Congener)
 
fisl <- unique(eu@output$Fish)
 
fisl <- unique(eu@output$Fish)
Line 162: Line 161:
 
   direction = "wide"
 
   direction = "wide"
 
)
 
)
 +
 +
# Find the level of quantification for dinterval function
 +
LOQ <- unlist(lapply(fishsamples[3:ncol(fishsamples)], FUN = function(x) min(x[x!=0])))
 +
names(LOQ) <- conl
 
cong <- data.matrix(fishsamples[3:ncol(fishsamples)])
 
cong <- data.matrix(fishsamples[3:ncol(fishsamples)])
cong[cong == 0] <- 0.001 # Would be better to use tinterval instead
+
cong[cong == 0] <- 0.01 # NA # Needed for dinterval
  
 
mod <- textConnection("
 
mod <- textConnection("
 
   model{
 
   model{
 
     for(i in 1:S) { # s = fish sample
 
     for(i in 1:S) { # s = fish sample
       for(j in 1:C) { # C = congener}
+
       for(j in 1:C) { # C = congener
 +
#        below.LOQ[i,j] ~ dinterval(-cong[i,j], -LOQ[j])
 
         cong[i,j] ~ dlnorm(mu[fis[i],j], tau[fis[i],j])
 
         cong[i,j] ~ dlnorm(mu[fis[i],j], tau[fis[i],j])
 
       }
 
       }
 
     }
 
     }
 
     for(i in 1:F) { # F = fish species
 
     for(i in 1:F) { # F = fish species
       for(j in 1:C) { # C = congener}
+
       for(j in 1:C) { # C = congener
         mu[i,j] ~ dunif(0.001,1000)
+
         mu[i,j] ~ dunif(-3,3)#0.001,1000)
 
         tau[i,j] <- pow(sigma[i,j], -2)
 
         tau[i,j] <- pow(sigma[i,j], -2)
 
         sigma[i,j] ~ dunif(0, 10)
 
         sigma[i,j] ~ dunif(0, 10)
Line 180: Line 184:
 
       }
 
       }
 
     }
 
     }
 
+
   
 
     for(i in 1:U) { # U = observation in the questionnaire
 
     for(i in 1:U) { # U = observation in the questionnaire
       for(j in 1:Q) { # Q = multiple choice question in the questionnaire
+
       for(j in 1:Q) { # Q = question in the questionnaire
 
         ans[i,j] ~ dbin(p[age[i],country[i],gender[i],j], 9)
 
         ans[i,j] ~ dbin(p[age[i],country[i],gender[i],j], 9)
 
       }
 
       }
 
     }
 
     }
     for(i in 1:A) {
+
     for(i in 1:A) { # Age groups
       for(j in 1:B) {
+
       for(j in 1:B) { # Countries
         for(k in 1:H) {
+
         for(k in 1:H) { #Genders
           for(l in 1:Q) {
+
           for(l in 1:Q) { # Questions
             p[i,j,k,l] ~ dunif(0,1)
+
             p[i,j,k,l] ~ dunif(0,1)  
             ans.pred[i,j,k,l] <- dbin(p[i,j,k,l], 9)
+
             ans.pred[i,j,k,l] ~ dbin(p[i,j,k,l], 9)
 
           }
 
           }
 
         }
 
         }
Line 206: Line 210:
 
     F = length(fisl),
 
     F = length(fisl),
 
     cong = cong,
 
     cong = cong,
 +
#    LOQ = LOQ,
 +
#    below.LOQ = is.na(cong)*1,
 
     fis = match(fishsamples$Fish, fisl),
 
     fis = match(fishsamples$Fish, fisl),
 
     U = nrow(answer),
 
     U = nrow(answer),
Line 222: Line 228:
  
 
update(jags, 100)
 
update(jags, 100)
samps <- jags.samples(jags, c('mu', 'pcd.pred'), 1000)
+
samps <- jags.samples(jags, c('mu', 'pcd.pred', 'ans.pred'), 1000)
 
samps.coda <- coda.samples(jags, c('mu', 'pcd.pred', 'ans.pred'), 1000)
 
samps.coda <- coda.samples(jags, c('mu', 'pcd.pred', 'ans.pred'), 1000)
 
objects.store(samps)
 
objects.store(samps)
Line 229: Line 235:
 
#temp <- adply(samps$mu, c(1,2,3,4))
 
#temp <- adply(samps$mu, c(1,2,3,4))
  
if(FALSE){
+
#if(TRUE){
samps <- jags.samples(jags, c('mu', 'pred'), 1000)
 
pl <- melt(array(samps$pred, dim = c(length(conl), length(fisl), 1000, 4),
 
  dimnames = list(
 
  Congener = conl,
 
  Fish = fisl,
 
  Iter = 1:1000,
 
  Seed = 1:4
 
  )
 
))
 
  
ggplot(pl, aes(x = value, colour = Fish))+geom_density(size = 1) +
+
  pl <- melt(
  facet_wrap(~ Congener, scale = "free_y") + coord_cartesian(xlim = c(-1.5,1.5))
+
    array(samps$pcd.pred,  
 
+
    dim = c(length(conl), length(fisl), 1000, 4),
ggplot(pl[pl$Fish %in% c("Baltic herring", "Rainbow trout", "Pike-perch", "Pike", "Salmon", "Sprat") , ], aes(x = value, colour = Fish))+geom_density(size = 1) +  
+
    dimnames = list(
  facet_wrap(~ Congener, scale = "free_y") + coord_cartesian(xlim = c(-1.5,1.5))
+
      Congener = conl,  
 
+
      Fish = fisl,
samps.coda <- coda.samples(jags, c('mu', 'pred'), 1000)
+
      Iter = 1:1000,
 
+
      Seed = c("S1","S2","S3","S4")
out <- data.frame(
+
    )
  Congener = conl,
+
  ))
  Fish = rep(fisl, each = length(conl)),
+
 
  Param = rep(c("mu", "pred"), each = length(conl)*length(fisl)),
+
  ggplot(eu@output, aes(x = euResult, colour = Fish))+geom_density(size = 1) +
  Value = (summary(samps.coda)[[1]][,1])
+
    scale_x_log10() +
)
+
    facet_wrap(~ Congener, scales = "free_y") + coord_cartesian(xlim = c(1E-3,1E3))+
 
+
    labs(title = "Probability densities of PCDD/F concentrations directly from data")
oprint(out)
+
 
 
+
  ggplot(pl, aes(x = value, colour = Fish))+geom_density(size = 1) +
ggplot(out[out$Param == "mu", ], aes(x = Congener, y = Value, colour = Fish, group = Fish)) +  
+
    scale_x_log10() +
  geom_line() + labs(title = "Congener amounts in fish compared with TCDD", y = "Log_10 ratio")  
+
    facet_wrap(~ Congener, scales = "free_y") + coord_cartesian(xlim = c(1E-3,1E3))+
 +
  labs(title = "Probability densities of PCDD/F concentrations from bayes model")
 +
 
 +
  ggplot(pl[pl$Fish == "Baltic herring",], aes(x = Iter, y = value, group = Seed, colour = Seed))+
 +
    geom_line() + scale_y_log10() +
 +
    facet_wrap(~ Congener, scales = "free_y") + coord_cartesian(ylim = c(1E-3,1E3))
  
 +
#  aggregate(pl["value"], by = pl[c("Congener", "Fish")], FUN = mean)
 +
 
 +
  ggplot(pl[pl$Fish %in% c("Baltic herring", "Rainbow trout", "Pike-perch", "Pike", "Salmon", "Sprat") , ], aes(x = value, colour = Fish))+geom_density(size = 1) +
 +
    facet_wrap(~ Congener, scale = "free_y") + coord_cartesian(xlim = c(-1.5,1.5))
 +
 
 +
  samps.coda <- coda.samples(jags, c('mu', 'pred'), 1000)
 +
 
 +
  out <- data.frame(
 +
    Congener = conl,
 +
    Fish = rep(fisl, each = length(conl)),
 +
    Param = rep(c("mu", "pred"), each = length(conl)*length(fisl)),
 +
    Value = (summary(samps.coda)[[1]][,1])
 +
  )
 +
 
 +
  oprint(out)
 +
 
 +
  ggplot(out[out$Param == "mu", ], aes(x = Congener, y = Value, colour = Fish, group = Fish)) +
 +
    geom_line() + labs(title = "Congener amounts in fish compared with TCDD", y = "Log_10 ratio")
 +
 
 
   tef <- Ovariable("tef", ddata = "Op_en4017", subset = "TEF values")
 
   tef <- Ovariable("tef", ddata = "Op_en4017", subset = "TEF values")
 
   tef <- EvalOutput(tef)
 
   tef <- EvalOutput(tef)
Line 267: Line 288:
 
   #levels(eu$Congener) <- gsub("CoPCB", "PCB", levels(eu$Congener))
 
   #levels(eu$Congener) <- gsub("CoPCB", "PCB", levels(eu$Congener))
 
   euteq <- eu * tef
 
   euteq <- eu * tef
} # IF FALSE
+
#} # IF FALSE
 +
 
 
</rcode>
 
</rcode>
  

Revision as of 09:28, 28 February 2017



Scope

This assessment is part of the WP5 work in Goherr project. Purpose is to evaluate health benefits and risks caused of eating Baltic herring and salmon in four Baltic sea countries (Denmark, Estonia, Finland and Sweden). This assessment is currently on-going.

Question

What are the current population level health benefits and risks of eating Baltic herring and salmon in Finland, Estonia, Denmark and Sweden? How would the health effects change in the future, if consumption of Baltic herring and salmon changes due to actions caused by different management scenarios of Baltic sea fish stocks?

Intended use and users

Results of this assessment are used to inform policy makers about the health impacts of fish. Further, this assessment will be combined with the results of the other Goherr WPs to produce estimates of future health impacts of Baltic fish related to different policy options. Especially, results of this assessment will be used as input in the decision support model built in Goherr WP6.

Participants

  • National institute for health and welfare (THL)
  • Goherr project group

Boundaries

  • Four baltic sea countries (Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Sweden)
  • Current situation (fish use year 2016, pollutant levels in fish year 2010?)
  • Estimation for future (year 2020?)

Decisions and scenarios

Management scenarios developed in Goherr WP3 frames the following boundaries to the use and consumption of Baltic herring and salmon as human food. Effect of these scenarios to the dioxin levels and the human food use will be evalauted quantitatively and feed into the health benefit-risk model to assess the health effect changes.

  • Scenario 1: “Transformation to sustainability”
    • Hazardous substances, including dioxins, are gradually flushed out and the dioxin levels in Baltic herring are below or close to the maximum allowable level.
    • Fish stocks are allowed to recover to levels, which makes maximum sustainable yield possible and increases the total catches of wild caught fish. The catches of salmon by commercial fisheries has stabilized at low level, while the share of recreational catch increases slightly.
    • The use of the Baltic herring catch for food increases. A regional proactive management plan for the use of catch has increased the capacity of the fishing fleets to fish herring for food and through product development and joint marketing, have increased consumer demand for Baltic herring.
  • Scenario 2: “Business-as-usual”
    • The commercial catches of salmon continue to decrease. The demand for top predatory species, such as salmon and cod remains high, while the demand for herring decreased further as a result of demographic changes.
    • Most of the herring catch are used for fish meal and oil production in the region.
    • The use of Baltic herring from the southern parts of the Baltic Sea where the dioxin contents are not likely to exceed the maximum allowable level, are prioritised for human consumption. In the absence of the demand in many of the Baltic Sea countries, majority of the herring intended for direct human consumption are exported to Russia.
  • Scenario 3: “Inequality”
    • The nutrient and dioxins levels continue to decrease slowly.
    • The commercial catches of salmon have decreased further as the general attitudes favour recreational fishing, which has also resulted in decreased demand.
    • The herring catches have increased slightly, but the availability of herring suitable for human consumption remains low due to both, dioxin levels that remain above the maximum allowable limit in the northern Baltic Sea and the poor capacity to fish for food.
    • The use of the catch varies between countries. In Estonia, for example, where the whole catch has been traditionally used for human consumption, there is no significant change in this respect, but in Finland, Sweden and Denmark, herring fishing is predominantly feed directed.
  • Scenario 4: “Transformation to protectionism”
    • The level of hazardous substances also increases as emission sources are not adequately addressed.
    • Commercial salmon fisheries disappears almost completely from the Baltic Sea, although restocking keeps small scale fisheries going.
    • Many of the Baltic herring stocks are also fished above the maximum sustainable yield and total catches are declining.
    • Owing to the growing dioxin levels detected in herring, majority of the catch is used for aquaculture.

Timing

  • Model development during 2016 and 2017
  • First set of results in March 2017, draft publication in March 2018

Answer

This section will be updated as soon as preliminary results are available

Results

Conclusions

Rationale

Error creating thumbnail: Unable to save thumbnail to destination
Schematic picture of the health benefit-risk model for Baltic herring and salmon intake.

Stakeholders

  • Policy makers
    • Food safety authorities
    • Fisheries management
  • Researchers
    • Food safety
    • Health
  • NGO's
    • WWF
    • Active consumers
    • Marine Stewardship Council
  • Baltic sea fishers and producers?

Dependencies

Content of all variable pages below are preliminary and will be updated when this assessment proceeds.

Analyses

Indices

  • Country (Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Sweden)
  • Year (current, future)
  • Sex
  • Age (categories?)
  • Fish species (Baltic herring, Baltic salmon)
  • Health end-point (ICD-10 code?, name? something else? --# : This need to be matched for disability weight, duration of disease, background incidence and disease burden data, dose-responses --Arja (talk) 09:39, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Compound (pollutant, fatty acid) --# : This needs to be matched with dose-responses --Arja (talk) 09:39, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Calculations

This section will have the actual health benefit-risk model (schematically described in the above figure) written with R. The code will utilise all variables listed in the above Dependencies section. Model results are presented as tables and figures when those are available.

  • Model run 28.2.2017 [1]

+ Show code

References


Keywords

See also

Goherr Research project 2015-2018: Integrated governance of Baltic herring and salmon stocks involving stakeholders
Error creating thumbnail: Unable to save thumbnail to destination
Goherr public website

Workpackages including task description and follow-up:
WP1 Management · WP2 Sociocultural use, value and goverrnance of Baltic salmon and herring · WP3 Scenarios and management objectives · WP4 Linking fish physiology to food production and bioaccumulation of dioxin · WP5 Linking the health of the Baltic Sea with health of humans: Dioxin · WP6 Building a decision support model for integrated governance · WP7 Dissemination

Other relevant pages in Opasnet: GOHERR assessment · Relevant literature

Relevant data: Exposure response functions of dioxins · Fish consumption in Sweden · POP concentrations in Baltic sea fish · Exposure response functions of Omega3 fatty acids

Relevant methods: Health impact assessment · OpasnetBaseUtils‎ · Modelling in Opasnet

Relevant assessments: Benefit-risk assessment of Baltic herring · Benefit-risk assessment on farmed salmon · Benefit-risk assessment of methyl mercury and omega-3 fatty acids in fish · Benefit-risk assessment of fish consumption for Beneris · Benefit-risk assessment of Baltic herring (in Finnish)

Error creating thumbnail: Unable to save thumbnail to destination
Error creating thumbnail: Unable to save thumbnail to destination

http://www.bonusportal.org/ http://www.bonusprojects.org/bonusprojects

Related files