Latest news with #riskassessment
Yahoo
11 hours ago
- Business
- Yahoo
LexisNexis rolls out commercial property risk assessment tool
LexisNexis Risk Solutions has launched LexisNexis Location Intelligence for Commercial, a new commercial property risk assessment solution in the US. The solution aims to enhance underwriting and renewal processes by providing predictive modelling capabilities to evaluate property risks. The tool combines industry loss data, weather forensics and property characteristics into predictive modelling risk scores. It also includes proprietary claims information and neural network-driven models to deliver insights to insurers for assessing commercial property risk. The predictive model offers 20-times lift, helping insurers identify 10% of properties driving 34% of weather-related losses, the company's press release said. The solution integrates with existing underwriting and renewal workflows and supports risk control strategies. LexisNexis Risk Solutions commercial insurance senior vice-president David Zona said: "As opposed to conventional sources of information from basic weather data, roof age and aerial imagery, LexisNexis Location Intelligence represents a new standard for commercial property risk assessment that helps give insurers the actionable intelligence they need for a fuller and more granular view of risk coupled with workflow automation they can actually leverage. 'With Location Intelligence, they can better assess risk, such as which 10% of the properties in their book could generate a third of their property losses. This can put them in a unique position to be a customer service leader, proactively working with their customers on risk mitigation and resilience efforts.' In February, LexisNexis released an AI-powered property survey solution for insurance carriers. "LexisNexis rolls out commercial property risk assessment tool " was originally created and published by Life Insurance International, a GlobalData owned brand. The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Business
- Yahoo
LexisNexis Risk Solutions Launches Location Intelligence: A First-of-Its-Kind Underwriting Solution for U.S. Commercial Property Risk Assessment
New proprietary solution delivers more than 20 times the lift, enabling commercial property insurers to help automate and optimize risk strategies with more accuracy ATLANTA , June 19, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- LexisNexis® Risk Solutions today announced the launch of LexisNexis® Location Intelligence for Commercial, a next-generation commercial property risk assessment solution that sets a new standard for more precise, automated and predictive modeling power in the U.S. commercial insurance sector at underwriting and renewal. As severe weather events continue to escalate in frequency and severity – driving more than 65% of all U.S. property losses1, commercial insurers face mounting challenges in underwriting, pricing and portfolio management. Location Intelligence for Commercial helps commercial insurance carriers better assess and spotlight property risks that are highly indicative of loss propensity. To address these blind spots in today's commercial underwriting processes, Location Intelligence for Commercial helps deliver insights using a holistic approach that combines industry loss data that is highly indicative of future loss, weather forensics and granular property characteristics into a suite of predictive modeling risk scores and supporting attributes. The patent-pending solution then adds proprietary claims information and neural network-driven risk propensity models to deliver actionable, future-focused insights directly into commercial insurance carrier workflows for a more detailed and accurate view of commercial property risk. "As opposed to conventional sources of information from basic weather data, roof age and aerial imagery, LexisNexis Location Intelligence represents a new standard for commercial property risk assessment that helps give insurers the actionable intelligence they need for a fuller and more granular view of risk coupled with workflow automation they can actually leverage," said David Zona, senior vice president, commercial insurance, LexisNexis Risk Solutions. "With Location Intelligence, they can better assess risk, such as which 10% of the properties in their book could generate a third of their property losses. This can put them in a unique position to be a customer service leader, proactively working with their customers on risk mitigation and resilience efforts." LexisNexis Location Intelligence capabilities include: Unmatched Predictive Modeling Lift: Can deliver over 20 times the lift2 compared to traditional loss propensity models, enabling commercial insurance carriers to better pinpoint the 10% of properties likely to generate 34% of weather-related losses in the coming year. Multi-Source Intelligence: Synthesizes aerial imagery, LexisNexis Risk Solutions comprehensive claims data, weather events and proprietary information for a more complete, accurate risk profile far beyond what imagery alone can provide and not just a point-in-time snapshot. Automation and Efficiency: Integrates seamlessly into commercial insurance underwriting and renewal workflows, supporting straight-through processing and enabling more efficient, targeted risk control strategies. Transparency and Communication: Provides a more transparent, multi-source approach to risk assessment, positioning commercial insurance carriers to more easily adapt to evolving regulatory requirements and communicate to business owners a more robust view of their commercial property risk, helping to ensure they are adequately insured in the event of a claim. "We understand that insurance underpins the economy, and commercial property insurers need to be able to confidently manage risk and improve profitability as they look to support the nation's small business foundation," continued Zona. "With year-over-year losses and the growing volatility of weather patterns, insurance carriers need more than historical data to win the day. They need forward-looking, actionable insights to better identify underwriting risk and improve profitability so they can continue helping their business customers thrive." For more information, please visit LexisNexis Location Intelligence for Commercial. About LexisNexis Risk SolutionsLexisNexis® Risk Solutions harnesses the power of data, sophisticated analytics platforms and technology solutions to provide insights that help businesses across multiple industries and governmental entities reduce risk and improve decisions to benefit people around the globe. Headquartered in metro Atlanta, Georgia, we have offices throughout the world and are part of RELX (LSE: REL/NYSE: RELX), a global provider of information-based analytics and decision tools for professional and business customers. For more information, please visit LexisNexis Risk Solutions and RELX. 1 LexisNexis Risk Solutions internal study, 20252 LexisNexis Risk Solutions internal study, 2024 Contact: Chas View original content to download multimedia: SOURCE LexisNexis Risk Solutions Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data
RNZ News
5 days ago
- Politics
- RNZ News
Glyphosate to be debated in High Court
The ELI is challenging the EPA's 2024 refusal to reassess glyphosate and glyphosate-based substances. Photo: AFP The judicial review hearing - which is expected to last two days - will see ELI challenge the EPA's 2024 refusal to reassess glyphosate and glyphosate-based substances. There had been significant scientific research on the herbicide since it was first introduced to New Zealand about 50 years ago, Environmental Law Initiative senior legal advisor Tess Upperton said. That was the grounds ELI used in their formal request for a risk reassessment, but the EPA refused last year, prompting the judicial review set to be heard today and tomorrow. Upperton said while the EPA had reviewed some aspects over the years, such as looking at carcinogenicity of glyphosate in 2015, there had never been a full risk assessment, which is the usual protocol when a new product is first approved for use. "That's largely because it was first approved in the 1970s. We have asked the EPA for a record of that original risk assessment. They don't have a copy of that. They don't know what it is." Since then, RoundUp and the more than 90 other glyphosate based formulas sold in New Zealand had been "grandfathered through successive regimes," she said, even though some of the glyphosate-based formulas have been found to have additional ingredients that amplify glyphosates toxicity. In 2021, the EPA issued a "call for information" to assess whether there were grounds to reassess the use of glyphosate. "It went out to the public and asked industry, NGOs, lay people, how do you use glyphosate? What do you see as the risks? And they got a lot of useful information back, but that isn't providing scientific evidence of what the risks are, which there's a lot of information about overseas." She said there was a dearth of domestic studies, particularly on the impact on indigenous species in Aotearoa. "Certainly when we submitted our request to them providing significant new information and asking them to take the good hard look that hadn't been taken domestically before, we were surprised they said no. "There's a wealth of new published peer-reviewed, well conducted research on glyphosate and there are new studies coming out all the time." The bid for a risk assessment did not directly relate to a proposal being considered by the Ministry for Primary Industries , which could see the amount of glyphosate allowed on some crops increased exponentially , but Upperton says one assessment feeds into another, and ELI believed any reassessment of the MRL should wait until after the EPA had conducted a full risk assessment. The government was proposing increasing the MRL from 0.1 milligrams per kilogram for wheat, barley and oat grains to 10 milligrams per kilogram, and 6 milligrams per kilogram for peas. The MRL is partially based on a permitted daily exposure for food (PDE), which was set by the EPA's predecessor, the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA), more than 20 years ago. A public submission period which closed in mid-May saw the ministry receive more than 3100 submissions on the proposal. A spokesperson said it was too soon to have analysed the large of submissions, or to give a timeframe for that to happen. ELI was not calling for an immediate ban on glyphosate, and any possible controls coming out of a reassessment would be up to the EPA and based on scientific conclusions, Upperton said. New Zealand is one of the most permissive regulators of glyphosate globally, including allowing glyphosate use in settings where it's banned elsewhere - such as a pre-harvest desiccant on crops, a practice prohibited in the European Union, she said. Several European countries have banned the domestic sale of glyphosate, restricting its use to regulated agricultural and commercial settings, while in the United States, the manufacturer of the leading glyphosate-based herbicide, Bayer, pulled RoundUp from the residential market itself in an effort to pre-empt further litigation, which has seen the company pay billions of dollars to settle cases over potential links to cancer , with another 67,000 cases pending. Last year, the European Union approved glyphosate use for another decade after member states deadlocked for a second time on the issue, but a number of European countries, including France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Austria and Germany have partial bans in place. Multiple challenges to the decision are before the European Court of Justice. "There's a whole spectrum of regulation out there. Some countries have banned it, some have restricted its use. New Zealand is at the really permissive end of the spectrum in terms of those with developed regulatory systems, we use a lot of it and everyone can use it, which is quite unusual." The human health impacts of glyphosate are disputed. In 2015, the World Health Organisation's International Agency for Research on Cancer found glyphosate was a probable carcinogen and found strong evidence for genotoxicity, or the ability to damage DNA. One of the grounds to trigger a reassessment is the existence of significant new information about the effects of the chemical, which was the route ELI took in it's request. "There's a whole wealth of new, published, peer reviewed, well conducted research out there about glyphosate, and there's new studies coming out all the time, it's a really developing area." Upperton felt there were two reasons for burgeoning body of evidence on the possible health impacts of glyphosate. "Firstly, long term or chronic effects take a while to show up and into evidence. So if we've had glyphosate now for about 50 years in our populations, those effects are going to be more and more widely felt, but the other primary reason is that when these chemicals are introduced, the assessment of them is reliant on studies of their toxicity, for example, that are conducted by industry itself. "Which makes sense - they should be looking into the safety of their own products - but they also have a very clear direct financial interest in these things being approved. It does mean - and it has been borne out in relation to several different substances, including glyphosate - their studies might focus on less real world effects and more in the laboratory where it doesn't really represent how it would be used In the real world. "It's not to discount industry studies in their entirety, but in ELI's view, independent science is also important because it's a check on that kind of inherent conflict of interest that industry has." The inability to sue companies in the same way as some other jursidictions - Bayer has spent more than US$11 billion settling close to 100,000 lawsuits in the United States, and is attempting to have legislation passed in some states to shield it from future litigation, while reportedly considering dropping the product altogether - meant New Zealanders had to rely even more on the EPA, she said. "You can't sue someone for using glyphosate, or getting sick from glyphosate in New Zealand because of the bar on personal injury claims - that actually makes us more dependent on our regulator to step in and do these things because we can't take these actions in private capacities. We have to use the EPA and ask the EPA to do its job, which is really what this case is about." The situation also highlighted a "wider issue for the EPA and for environmental regulation in Aoteaora generally" which was the under resourcing of the EPA, Upperton said. "ELI is not saying the EPA needs to ban glyphosate tomorrow - we recognise that there's a lot of competing interest and resources at play here. What we want to do is is put it on the radar, put it on the list of things to be thought about, because there is a really big backlog of chemicals that need to be looked at by the EPA. I recognise they aren't resourced to be adequately doing their job at the moment." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
5 days ago
- Politics
- RNZ News
Glyphosate health issues to be debated in High Court
The ELI is challenging the EPA's 2024 refusal to reassess glyphosate and glyphosate-based substances. Photo: AFP The judicial review hearing - which is expected to last two days - will see ELI challenge the EPA's 2024 refusal to reassess glyphosate and glyphosate-based substances. There had been significant scientific research on the herbicide since it was first introduced to New Zealand about 50 years ago, Environmental Law Initiative senior legal advisor Tess Upperton said. That was the grounds ELI used in their formal request for a risk reassessment, but the EPA refused last year, prompting the judicial review set to be heard today and tomorrow. Upperton said while the EPA had reviewed some aspects over the years, such as looking at carcinogenicity of glyphosate in 2015, there had never been a full risk assessment, which is the usual protocol when a new product is first approved for use. "That's largely because it was first approved in the 1970s. We have asked the EPA for a record of that original risk assessment. They don't have a copy of that. They don't know what it is." Since then, RoundUp and the more than 90 other glyphosate based formulas sold in New Zealand had been "grandfathered through successive regimes," she said, even though some of the glyphosate-based formulas have been found to have additional ingredients that amplify glyphosates toxicity. In 2021, the EPA issued a "call for information" to assess whether there were grounds to reassess the use of glyphosate. "It went out to the public and asked industry, NGOs, lay people, how do you use glyphosate? What do you see as the risks? And they got a lot of useful information back, but that isn't providing scientific evidence of what the risks are, which there's a lot of information about overseas." She said there was a dearth of domestic studies, particularly on the impact on indigenous species in Aotearoa. "Certainly when we submitted our request to them providing significant new information and asking them to take the good hard look that hadn't been taken domestically before, we were surprised they said no. "There's a wealth of new published peer-reviewed, well conducted research on glyphosate and there are new studies coming out all the time." The bid for a risk assessment did not directly relate to a proposal being considered by the Ministry for Primary Industries , which could see the amount of glyphosate allowed on some crops increased exponentially , but Upperton says one assessment feeds into another, and ELI believed any reassessment of the MRL should wait until after the EPA had conducted a full risk assessment. The government was proposing increasing the MRL from 0.1 milligrams per kilogram for wheat, barley and oat grains to 10 milligrams per kilogram, and 6 milligrams per kilogram for peas. The MRL is partially based on a permitted daily exposure for food (PDE), which was set by the EPA's predecessor, the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA), more than 20 years ago. A public submission period which closed in mid-May saw the ministry receive more than 3100 submissions on the proposal. A spokesperson said it was too soon to have analysed the large of submissions, or to give a timeframe for that to happen. ELI was not calling for an immediate ban on glyphosate, and any possible controls coming out of a reassessment would be up to the EPA and based on scientific conclusions, Upperton said. New Zealand is one of the most permissive regulators of glyphosate globally, including allowing glyphosate use in settings where it's banned elsewhere - such as a pre-harvest desiccant on crops, a practice prohibited in the European Union, she said. Several European countries have banned the domestic sale of glyphosate, restricting its use to regulated agricultural and commercial settings, while in the United States, the manufacturer of the leading glyphosate-based herbicide, Bayer, pulled RoundUp from the residential market itself in an effort to pre-empt further litigation, which has seen the company pay billions of dollars to settle cases over potential links to cancer , with another 67,000 cases pending. Last year, the European Union approved glyphosate use for another decade after member states deadlocked for a second time on the issue, but a number of European countries, including France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Austria and Germany have partial bans in place. Multiple challenges to the decision are before the European Court of Justice. "There's a whole spectrum of regulation out there. Some countries have banned it, some have restricted its use. New Zealand is at the really permissive end of the spectrum in terms of those with developed regulatory systems, we use a lot of it and everyone can use it, which is quite unusual." The human health impacts of glyphosate are disputed. In 2015, the World Health Organisation's International Agency for Research on Cancer found glyphosate was a probable carcinogen and found strong evidence for genotoxicity, or the ability to damage DNA. One of the grounds to trigger a reassessment is the existence of significant new information about the effects of the chemical, which was the route ELI took in it's request. "There's a whole wealth of new, published, peer reviewed, well conducted research out there about glyphosate, and there's new studies coming out all the time, it's a really developing area." Upperton felt there were two reasons for burgeoning body of evidence on the possible health impacts of glyphosate. "Firstly, long term or chronic effects take a while to show up and into evidence. So if we've had glyphosate now for about 50 years in our populations, those effects are going to be more and more widely felt, but the other primary reason is that when these chemicals are introduced, the assessment of them is reliant on studies of their toxicity, for example, that are conducted by industry itself. "Which makes sense - they should be looking into the safety of their own products - but they also have a very clear direct financial interest in these things being approved. It does mean - and it has been borne out in relation to several different substances, including glyphosate - their studies might focus on less real world effects and more in the laboratory where it doesn't really represent how it would be used In the real world. "It's not to discount industry studies in their entirety, but in ELI's view, independent science is also important because it's a check on that kind of inherent conflict of interest that industry has." The inability to sue companies in the same way as some other jursidictions - Bayer has spent more than US$11 billion settling close to 100,000 lawsuits in the United States, and is attempting to have legislation passed in some states to shield it from future litigation, while reportedly considering dropping the product altogether - meant New Zealanders had to rely even more on the EPA, she said. "You can't sue someone for using glyphosate, or getting sick from glyphosate in New Zealand because of the bar on personal injury claims - that actually makes us more dependent on our regulator to step in and do these things because we can't take these actions in private capacities. We have to use the EPA and ask the EPA to do its job, which is really what this case is about." The situation also highlighted a "wider issue for the EPA and for environmental regulation in Aoteaora generally" which was the under resourcing of the EPA, Upperton said. "ELI is not saying the EPA needs to ban glyphosate tomorrow - we recognise that there's a lot of competing interest and resources at play here. What we want to do is is put it on the radar, put it on the list of things to be thought about, because there is a really big backlog of chemicals that need to be looked at by the EPA. I recognise they aren't resourced to be adequately doing their job at the moment." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
The Australian
12-06-2025
- Business
- The Australian
Study backs Rhythm's colorectal risk model
Rhythm publishes peer-reviewed study validating its next-generation colorectal cancer risk assessment model Proprietary geneType assessment enhanced and cross-validated using data from nearly 400,000 individuals in UK Biobank Next generation geneType design continues focus on usability and simplicity, while providing superior performance Special Report: Rhythm Biosciences has published a peer-reviewed study in PLoS One validating its next-generation colorectal cancer risk assessment model, marking a major step forward in predictive cancer diagnostics. Rhythm Biosciences (ASX:RHY) said the study detailed updates and improvements to its proprietary geneType colorectal cancer risk assessment, which was enhanced and cross-validated using data from nearly 400,000 individuals in the UK Biobank. Rhythm said the article titled 'Colorectal cancer risk prediction using a simple multivariable model' described creation and validation of a new risk model that incorporated sex-specific factors and outperformed current models. The company said as colorectal cancer was a disease associated with many environmental and lifestyle risk factors, the study focused on expanding its geneType model beyond the two primary risk factors – family history and polygenic risk. Watch: Inside ColoSTAT's road to market Key findings of study Rhythm said the study delivered several key findings, most notably development of the enhanced risk model that incorporated three additional risk factors. These factors were selected for their strong associations with colorectal cancer and ease of use in a clinical setting, improving the model's predictive performance over standard family history assessments. The company said the most impactful risk factors were identified and integrated into an updated geneType risk model, which was then tested using data from the UK Biobank. Rhythm said other key findings included: Commitment to improvement – The study highlighted the importance of including clinical and lifestyle factors in multifactorial diseases like colorectal cancer. Commercial application – The new model was designed with commercial clinical applications in mind, minimising the number of risk factors while maximising predictive accuracy. Sex-specific factors – Incorporating sex-specific risk factors enhances model performance across diverse populations. Superior performance – A multivariable risk assessment is shown to be superior to standard of care of family history assessment in its ability to predict risk of developing colorectal cancer. 'Significantly improve stratified screening' Rhythm director of scientific affairs Dr Erika Spaeth said publishing the findings in PLoS One underscored its commitment to advancing cancer risk prediction. 'Our new multifactorial model outperforms previous methods based solely on polygenic risk and family history,' she said. 'By integrating clinical and lifestyle factors, we enhance our prediction accuracy for colorectal cancer. 'We're excited about these results and confident that this model will significantly improve stratified screening in the population." This article was developed in collaboration with Rhythm Biosciences, a Stockhead advertiser at the time of publishing. This article does not constitute financial product advice. You should consider obtaining independent advice before making any financial decisions.
