efsa-opinion-chromium-food-drinking-water

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Chromium in food and drinking water SUMMARY In March 2012, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) received a request from the Hellenic Food Authority (EFET) for a scientific opinion on estimation of the risk to human health from the presence of chromium (Cr) in food and Cr(VI) in bottled water. Chromium is a metal widely distributed in the environment occurring in rocks, soil and volcanic dust and gases. Chromium can exist in a variety of oxidation states, with the trivalent (Cr(III)) and hexavalent (Cr(VI)) states being relatively stable and largely predominant. While Cr(III) is a natural dietary constituent present in a variety of foods and also in dietary supplements, Cr(VI) most commonly occurs in industrial processes and is present in drinking water usually as a consequence of anthropogenic contamination. At human dietary exposure levels chromium absorption is relatively low (< 10 % of the ingested dose) and depends on its valence state and ligands. Most of the ingested Cr(VI) is considered to be reduced in the stomach to Cr(III), which is poorly bioavailable and presents low ability to enter cells. In contrast to Cr(III), Cr(VI) is able to cross cellular membranes. The interconversion of Cr(VI) to Cr(III) is of relevance for risk assessment since, in general, Cr(VI) compounds are much more toxic than Cr(III) compounds. There are no maximum levels (MLs) for chromium in food. A parametric value of 50 μg Cr/L for total chromium in water intended for human consumption and a Maximum Limit of 50 μg Cr/L for total chromium in natural mineral waters are laid down in Council Directive 98/83/EC and in Commission Directive 2003/40/EC, respectively. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified Cr(VI) compounds as carcinogenic to humans (Group 1) with respect to the cancer of the lung and also cancer of the nose and nasal sinuses based on evidence from occupational studies. Following a call for data on chromium (trivalent and hexavalent) levels in food and drinking water (water intended for human consumption and mineral waters), a total of 79 809 analytical results on chromium were available in the EFSA database by the end of February 2013. A total of 27 074 analytical results were reported for food and 52 735 for all types of drinking water (including e.g. tap water, bottled water and well water) covering the period from 2000 to 2012. Data were mainly from 1 Member State although 11 other European countries were represented. Information on oxidation state was not available for occurrence data in food, and for drinking water only 88 analytical results were received on Cr(VI), all in bottled water. Almost 50 % of the results on food samples were left-censored. After data cleaning and validation and using different cut-offs based on the reported limits of quantification (LOQs), 24 629 analytical results for food were considered for this assessment. At FoodEx level 1 all the food groups were well represented, with a maximum of 4 647 samples in the food group ‘Vegetables and vegetable products (including fungi)’. The five food groups of highest average chromium occurrence values were ‘Products for special nutritional use’, ‘Herbs, spices and condiments’, ‘Sugar and confectionary’, ‘Vegetables and vegetable products (including fungi)’, and ‘Animal and vegetable fats and oils’. There is a lack of data on the presence of Cr(VI) in food. The EFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM Panel) decided to consider all the reported analytical results in food as Cr(III). This assumption was based on the outcome of recent speciation work, the fact that food is by-andlarge a reducing medium, and that oxidation of Cr(III) to Cr(VI) would not be favoured in such a medium. However, the CONTAM Panel noted that if even a small proportion of total chromium in food was in the form of Cr(VI), it could contribute substantially to Cr(VI) exposure. Chronic dietary exposure to Cr(III) was estimated combining the food mean occurrence data with the food consumption data at the individual level. Following the standard representation used for CONTAM opinions, lower bound (LB) and upper bound (UB) mean chronic dietary exposure values were calculated for Cr(III), across the different dietary surveys and age classes. Overall mean human chronic dietary exposure ranged from a minimum LB of 0.6 to a maximum UB of 5.9 μg/kg b.w. per EFSA Journal 2014;12(3):3595 2
Chromium in food and drinking water day. The 95 th percentile dietary exposure values ranged from 1.1 (minimum LB) to 9.0 (maximum UB) μg/kg b.w. per day. Among the different age classes, ‘Toddlers’ showed the highest mean chronic dietary exposure to Cr(III) with minimum LB of 2.3 and maximum UB of 5.9 μg/kg b.w. per day. The adult populations (‘Adult’, ‘Elderly’ and ‘Very elderly’) showed lower exposure to Cr(III) than the younger populations. The mean chronic dietary exposure to Cr(III) varied between 0.6 µg/kg b.w. per day and 1.6 µg/kg b.w. per day (minimum LB and maximum UB, adults in both cases). The 95 th percentile chronic dietary exposure ranged from 1.1 μg/kg b.w. per day (minimum LB, ‘Elderly’) and 2.6 μg/kg b.w. per day (maximum UB, adults). In ‘Infants’ and ‘Toddlers’ the main contributors to the chronic exposure to Cr(III) were ‘Foods for infants and small children’, followed by ‘Milk and dairy products’ and ‘Bread and rolls’. In the other age classes, the main contributors to the chronic exposure to Cr(III) were the food categories ‘Milk and dairy products, ‘Bread and rolls’, ‘Chocolate (cocoa) products’ (except for ‘Elderly’ and ‘Very elderly’ population) and ‘Non-alcoholic beverages’. The food group ‘Vegetables and vegetable products (including fungi)’ contributed to the exposure to Cr(III) with median values that ranged from 4 % in ‘Adolescents’ and ‘Other children’, to 8 % in the ‘Elderly’ population. The assessment of the dietary exposure to Cr(III) in vegetarians was based on very limited data. The results indicated that virtually the same mean and 95 th dietary exposure are likely in the vegetarian population as compared to the general population. Overall, the Comprehensive Database contains limited information on the consumption of fortified foods, foodstuffs for particular nutritional use (PARNUTS) and food supplements. Based on previous EFSA opinions, the combined exposure from supplemental intake in adults (i.e. from fortified foods, PARNUTS and food supplements) would be between 910 µg/day for a typical intake and 1540 µg/day for upper intake (13 µg/kg b.w. per day and 22 µg/kg b.w. per day, respectively, for an adult of 70 kg b.w.). In the FoodEx classification system, the different types of water are grouped under the generic name ‘Drinking water’. Therefore, the generic term drinking water as used in this opinion includes both categories defined by the EU legislation, i.e. water intended for human consumption and natural mineral waters. Bottled water as used in this opinion includes natural mineral water, but also spring water and other bottled drinking waters, products that must comply with Council Directive 98/83/EC. More than 90 % of the results for all types of drinking water were left-censored. Concerning the data on bottled water, 11 % of the samples analysed both for Cr(VI) and total chromium reported no quantified values for both parameters. After data cleaning and validation, and applying a cut-off value of 10 μg/L on the LOQs reported for total chromium, a total of 46 234 analytical results on water (including 88 results on Cr(VI)) were selected for exposure calculations. Tap water samples were the most reported (61 %) with LB and UB mean occurrence values of 0.2 µg/L and 1.9 µg/L, respectively. In bottled water, the mean occurrence values ranged between 0.3 µg/L for carbonated mineral water (LB) and 3.4 µg/L at the UB reported for unspecified bottled water. The CONTAM Panel assumed that all chromium present in drinking water was Cr(VI) (worst case scenario) based on two reasons. First, the samples where both Cr(VI) and total chromium were quantified (71 out of 88 samples) showed an average ratio Cr(VI)/total chromium of 0.97. In addition the water intended for human consumption is usually treated with different oxidizing agents to make it potable, and this would promote the presence of Cr(VI) over that of Cr(III). The CONTAM Panel estimated separately the exposure to Cr(VI) in all types of drinking water and in bottled water. The mean chronic exposure to Cr(VI) from consumption of all types of drinking water ranged from 0.7 (minimum LB) to 159.1 ng/kg b.w. per day (maximum UB). The 95 th percentile exposure ranged from 2.8 (minimum LB) to 320.2 (maximum UB) ng/kg b.w. per day. The highest exposure to Cr(VI) through the consumption of all types of drinking water was estimated in the youngest populations (‘Infants’ and ‘Toddlers’). No consumption of bottled water was reported in several dietary surveys. In those dietary surveys with reported data on consumption of bottled water, the highest exposure to Cr(VI) was also estimated in the youngest populations (‘Infants’ and ‘Toddlers’), with a mean chronic exposure ranging from < 0.1 (minimum LB) to EFSA Journal 2014;12(3):3595 3
Page 1: EFSA Journal 2014;12(3):3595 SCIENT
Page 5 and 6: Chromium in food and drinking water
Page 37 and 38: 4.2.2.1. Data collection on food (e
Page 39 and 40: Sampling year Number of samples Chr
Page 41 and 42: Number of analtycal results Samplin
Page 43 and 44: 4.2.4. Occurrence data by food cate
Page 53 and 54:
Chromium in food and drinking water
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
7.2.1.4. Genotoxicity Chromium in f
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
7.2.2.3. Developmental and reproduc
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
7.5. Dose-response assessment Chrom
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Human observations Chromium in food
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Chromium in food and bottled water
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
J.1.2. mice Chromium in food and bo
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261:
show all

efsa-opinion-chromium-food-drinking-water

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?