The phrase "a given level of exposure" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when discussing a specific amount or degree of exposure to a particular situation, risk, or environment.
Example: "The study aims to assess the effects of a given level of exposure to pollutants on respiratory health."
Alternatives: "a specific degree of exposure" or "a certain amount of exposure."
That is, do minority communities have less protection against a given level of exposure, and do these disparities in protection result from differential social policy?
Age dependency in the risk of infection by TSEs will reflect any age dependency in exposure to infection and/or in susceptibility to infection for a given level of exposure.
Some populations may have a different health response to environmental conditions, meaning that a given level of exposure could have a larger impact on some groups than on others (Bell and Dominici 2008; Grineski et al. 2010; Zanobetti and Schwartz 2000).
The U.S. EPA uses the following formula to calculate excess risk (or extra risk) for a given level of exposure: The background risk of the disease of interest (i.e., the lifetime risk in the nonexposed) is subtracted from 1 in the denominator to scale the excess risk to the population expected to be free of background disease, a procedure used conventionally with rodent data.
With a well established exposure response profile, prediction of hazard can be made for a given level of exposure; such a profile also allows for the estimation of exposures at responses of different severities (e.g., the benchmark dose), which assists the risk assessor to make judgments to protect a population from increasingly severe effects.
The goal of human risk assessment is to decide whether a given level of exposure to a particular chemical or substance is acceptable to human health and to provide risk management measures based on an evaluation and prediction of the effects of that exposure on human health.
There is no safe level of exposure to a carcinogen.
In addition, children have higher levels of internal exposure than adults for a given level of environmental exposure because of lower body weight, and because their enzymatic detoxification mechanism for organophosphate pesticides is not fully developed (Huen et al. 2009).
Thus the effects at a given level of ongoing exposure may be higher than we estimate.
The AGI IRR is an estimate of relative risk defined as the estimated AGI person-time incidence rate at a given level of virus exposure divided by the estimated AGI person-time incidence rate for nondetects.
Those in the highest percentile of consumption had a significant reduction in risks, ranging from 46% (ERR decreased from 2.4 to 1.3) for pyridoxine to 68% (ERR decreased from 3.4 to 1.1) for vitamin C, at a given level of arsenic exposure (Table 3).
