efsa-opinion-chromium-food-drinking-water
efsa-opinion-chromium-food-drinking-water efsa-opinion-chromium-food-drinking-water
Chromium in food and drinking water the outcome of recent speciation work, the fact that food is by-and-large 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. The CONTAM Panel decided to consider all the chromium present in drinking water as Cr(VI). This assumption was based on the evidence that those water samples where both Cr(VI) and total Cr were quantified showed an average ratio Cr(VI)/total Cr of almost one. In addition the water intended for human consumption is usually treated with oxidizing agents to make it potable, which could favour the presence of Cr(VI) over that of Cr(III). Exposure to trivalent chromium via food excluding drinking water Mean chronic dietary exposure to Cr(III), across the different dietary surveys and age classes, ranged from 0.6 (minimum LB) to 5.9 μg/kg b.w. per day (maximum UB). The 95 th percentile dietary exposure ranged from 1.1 (minimum LB) to 9.0 μg/kg b.w. per day (maximum UB). Among the different age classes, toddlers showed the highest mean chronic dietary exposure to Cr(III) with values ranging from 2.3 (minimum LB) to 5.9 (maximum UB) μg/kg b.w. per day. In ‘Infants’ and ‘Toddlers’ the main contributor to the 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 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 between 4 % in ‘Adolescents’ and ‘Other children’, and 8 % in the ‘Elderly’ population. The assessment of the chronic dietary exposure to Cr(III) in vegetarians was based on very limited data. The results indicated virtually the same mean and 95 th percentile dietary exposure in the vegetarian population as for 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.). Exposure to hexavalent chromium (via drinking water and water used for food preparation) The mean chronic exposure to Cr(VI) from drinking water consumption 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 ng/kg b.w. per day (maximum UB). The highest exposure to Cr(VI) through the consumption of drinking water was estimated in the youngest populations (‘Infants’ and ‘Toddlers’). In those dietary surveys with reported data on consumption of bottled water, the mean chronic exposure to Cr(VI) from bottled water consumption ranged from < 0.1 (minimum LB) to 149.8 ng/kg b.w. per day (maximum UB, infants). The 95 th percentile exposure ranged from 0.0 (minimum LB) to 148.7 ng/kg b.w. per day (maximum UB, ‘Toddlers’). The highest exposure to Cr(VI) through the consumption of bottled water was also estimated in the youngest populations (‘Infants’ and ‘Toddlers’). EFSA Journal 2014;12(3):3595 122
Chromium in food and drinking water An additional contribution to the exposure to Cr(VI) was considered from the water used to prepare certain foods (coffee, tea infusions, and dry infant and follow-on food mainly, but also some others such as instant soup, evaporated and dried milk, and dehydrated fruit juice). A worst-case scenario, which assumed there was no reduction of the Cr(VI) present in water into Cr(III) when these foods are ingested immediately after their preparation. This scenario led to an increase up to two-fold in the exposure levels to Cr(VI), in comparison to those estimated via the consumption only of drinking water. Non dietary exposure to trivalent and hexavalent chromium The CONTAM Panel could not quantify the contribution of non-dietary exposure to Cr(III) or Cr(VI) due to the existing uncertainties on the levels of exposure via inhalation, the absorption rates of different chromium compounds via the respiratory system and the relevance of different chromium species for non-dietary exposure. The CONTAM Panel concluded that the exposure via the diet likely represents the most important contribution to the overall exposure to Cr in the general population. Inhalation of Cr compounds present in particular in cigarette smoke may contribute to the overall exposure levels but the currently available information does not allow quantification of its relative contribution. Hazard identification and characterisation Toxicokinetics There can be differences in the bioavailability of chromium resulting from intake of different forms of Cr(III) compounds, with organic complexes being somewhat more bioavailable, but these differences are small and the overall bioavailability of trivalent chromium from all these sources is low. In contrast to Cr(III), Cr(VI) is able to cross cellular membranes. The absorption and tissue distribution of Cr(VI) depend strongly on the rate and extent of its reduction in the gastrointestinal tract but also on the ligands bound to Cr(VI) or the Cr(III) formed upon reduction of Cr(VI). The data available so far support that reduction along the gastrointestinal tract is efficient but that it cannot be excluded that even at low dose levels a small percentage of Cr(VI) escapes gastrointestinal reduction to Cr(III). Trivalent chromium Repeated dose toxicity Cr(III) displays very little (small decrease in body weight or body weight gain) to no toxicity in experimental animals. The relevant NOAELs were 506 and 286 mg Cr(III)/kg b.w. per day (the highest doses tested) for the sub-chronic and long-term toxicity in the rat, respectively. Developmental and reproductive toxicity Conflicting results on reproductive effects of Cr(III) compounds have been reported. In the studies where effects on reproduction or development were reported, the lowest LOAELs were in the order of 30 mg/kg b.w. per day. The CONTAM Panel noted that a majority of the studies have methodological limitations and were not designed for establishing reference doses. EFSA Journal 2014;12(3):3595 123
- Page 71 and 72: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 73 and 74: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 75 and 76: 7.2.1.4. Genotoxicity Chromium in f
- Page 77 and 78: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 79 and 80: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 81 and 82: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 83 and 84: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 85 and 86: 7.2.2.3. Developmental and reproduc
- Page 87 and 88: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 89 and 90: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 91 and 92: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 93 and 94: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 95 and 96: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 97 and 98: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 99 and 100: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 101 and 102: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 103 and 104: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 105 and 106: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 107 and 108: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 109 and 110: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 111 and 112: 7.5. Dose-response assessment Chrom
- Page 113 and 114: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 115 and 116: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 117 and 118: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 119 and 120: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 121: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 125 and 126: Human observations Chromium in food
- Page 127 and 128: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 129 and 130: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 131 and 132: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 133 and 134: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 135 and 136: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 137 and 138: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 139 and 140: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 141 and 142: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 143 and 144: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 145 and 146: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 147 and 148: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 149 and 150: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 151 and 152: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 153 and 154: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 155 and 156: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 157 and 158: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 159 and 160: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 161 and 162: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 163 and 164: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 165 and 166: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 167 and 168: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 169 and 170: Chromium in food and drinking water
- Page 171 and 172: Chromium in food and drinking water
Chromium in <strong>food</strong> and <strong>drinking</strong> <strong>water</strong><br />
An additional contribution to the exposure to Cr(VI) was considered from the <strong>water</strong> used to<br />
prepare certain <strong>food</strong>s (coffee, tea infusions, and dry infant and follow-on <strong>food</strong> mainly, but<br />
also some others such as instant soup, evaporated and dried milk, and dehydrated fruit juice).<br />
A worst-case scenario, which assumed there was no reduction of the Cr(VI) present in <strong>water</strong><br />
into Cr(III) when these <strong>food</strong>s are ingested immediately after their preparation. This scenario<br />
led to an increase up to two-fold in the exposure levels to Cr(VI), in comparison to those<br />
estimated via the consumption only of <strong>drinking</strong> <strong>water</strong>.<br />
Non dietary exposure to trivalent and hexavalent <strong>chromium</strong><br />
The CONTAM Panel could not quantify the contribution of non-dietary exposure to Cr(III) or<br />
Cr(VI) due to the existing uncertainties on the levels of exposure via inhalation, the<br />
absorption rates of different <strong>chromium</strong> compounds via the respiratory system and the<br />
relevance of different <strong>chromium</strong> species for non-dietary exposure.<br />
The CONTAM Panel concluded that the exposure via the diet likely represents the most<br />
important contribution to the overall exposure to Cr in the general population. Inhalation of<br />
Cr compounds present in particular in cigarette smoke may contribute to the overall exposure<br />
levels but the currently available information does not allow quantification of its relative<br />
contribution.<br />
Hazard identification and characterisation<br />
Toxicokinetics<br />
There can be differences in the bioavailability of <strong>chromium</strong> resulting from intake of different<br />
forms of Cr(III) compounds, with organic complexes being somewhat more bioavailable, but<br />
these differences are small and the overall bioavailability of trivalent <strong>chromium</strong> from all these<br />
sources is low.<br />
In contrast to Cr(III), Cr(VI) is able to cross cellular membranes.<br />
The absorption and tissue distribution of Cr(VI) depend strongly on the rate and extent of its<br />
reduction in the gastrointestinal tract but also on the ligands bound to Cr(VI) or the Cr(III)<br />
formed upon reduction of Cr(VI). The data available so far support that reduction along the<br />
gastrointestinal tract is efficient but that it cannot be excluded that even at low dose levels a<br />
small percentage of Cr(VI) escapes gastrointestinal reduction to Cr(III).<br />
Trivalent <strong>chromium</strong><br />
Repeated dose toxicity<br />
Cr(III) displays very little (small decrease in body weight or body weight gain) to no toxicity<br />
in experimental animals.<br />
The relevant NOAELs were 506 and 286 mg Cr(III)/kg b.w. per day (the highest doses tested)<br />
for the sub-chronic and long-term toxicity in the rat, respectively.<br />
Developmental and reproductive toxicity<br />
Conflicting results on reproductive effects of Cr(III) compounds have been reported. In the<br />
studies where effects on reproduction or development were reported, the lowest LOAELs<br />
were in the order of 30 mg/kg b.w. per day. The CONTAM Panel noted that a majority of the<br />
studies have methodological limitations and were not designed for establishing reference<br />
doses.<br />
EFSA Journal 2014;12(3):3595 123