1 / 15

Dietary Supplements Joint Committee Meeting May 20, 2007

Dietary Supplements Joint Committee Meeting May 20, 2007. Recommended Changes to Pass/Fail Criteria for Metal Contaminants Clif McLellan Director of Toxicology Services NSF International. Presentation Outline.

shania
Download Presentation

Dietary Supplements Joint Committee Meeting May 20, 2007

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Dietary SupplementsJoint CommitteeMeetingMay 20, 2007 Recommended Changes to Pass/Fail Criteria for Metal Contaminants Clif McLellan Director of Toxicology Services NSF International

  2. Presentation Outline • Review ballot submitted to change pass/fail criteria for cadmium, chromium and lead Background of current criteria and reason for change • How were proposed criteria derived? • How are values calculated? • Current vs proposed levels • Impact of change for certified products

  3. Background of current criteria and reason for change • The current pass/fail criteria were originally established in 2003. The criteria were chosen because; • it was felt that using international criteria would better reflect the international focus of this program. • No data were available indicating the level of metal contaminants that would be expected. • Since 2003, the program has developed more as a North American Standard and it is now believed that the basis of the pass/fail criteria should be more reflective of North American Standards and be based on health effects endpoints whenever possible.

  4. How were proposed criteria derived (cadmium, chromium and lead)? • A review was performed to determine the best human health risk assessment available for cadmium, chromium and lead. • For cadmium and chromium the U.S. EPA risk assessments were determined to be the most current and used state-of-the art risk assessment procedures.

  5. How were proposed criteria set (Lead)? • Since there is no current safe level set for lead an alternate approach was required which met the following criteria; • as low as was achievable based on current test results • be more protective of sensitive sub populations (children and pregnant women).

  6. How are the criteria calculated based on daily safe levels?Finished Product Criteria Rfd (mg metal /kg-bw-day) * 60 kg-bw * RSC --- mg metal / day RSC = Relative Source Contribution = 0.1 (10% of daily acceptable level). Lab evaluation Lab result (mg metal / g product) * maximum recommended daily dose (g product / day) ---- mg metal /day

  7. How are the criteria calculated based on daily safe levels?Raw Ingredient Criteria Rfd (mg metal /kg-bw-day) * 60 kg-bw * RSC * 1/AUL * Unit conversion --- ug metal / g ingredient --- ppm RSC = Relative Source Contribution = 0.1 (10% of daily acceptable level) AUL = Assumed Use Level = 1000 mg ingredient Unit Conversion = 106 ug metal / 1g metal * Raw ingredients can be evaluated based upon a use level recommended by manufacturer Lab evaluation Lab result (ug metal / g ingredient) ---- ppm

  8. What other levels have been established (units - ug/day)?

  9. Raw Materials - Current vs Proposed Levels 5.3.1.1 Raw materials – Current Raw materials shall not contain undeclared metals in amounts greater than the following: – cadmium content shall not exceed 0.3 ppm; – chromium (VI) content shall not exceed 2 ppm; – lead content shall not exceed 10 ppm; and 5.3.1.1 Raw materials – Proposed Raw materials shall not contain undeclared inorganic metals in amounts greater than the following: – cadmium content shall not exceed 4.1 ppm; – chromium (VI) content shall not exceed 20 ppm; – lead content shall not exceed 15 ppm; and

  10. Finished Products - Current vs Proposed Levels 5.3.1.2 Finished products – Current Finished products shall not contain undeclared metals at rates of intake greater than the following: – cadmium content shall not exceed 0.006 mg/d; – chromium (VI) content shall not exceed 0.02 mg/d; – lead content shall not exceed 0.02 mg/d; 5.3.1.2 Finished products - Proposed Finished products shall not contain undeclared inorganic metals at rates of intake greater than the following: – cadmium content shall not exceed 0.0041 mg/d; – chromium (VI) content shall not exceed 0.02 mg/d; – lead content in products marketed for children or women shall not exceed 0.0005 mg/d; – lead content in all other products shall not exceed 0.015 mg/d; and

  11. Requested Action? Ballot proposed levels for adoption to Dietary Supplement Standard for inorganic cadmium, chromium VI and lead

  12. Basis for Current Criteria

  13. Relative Source Contribution • Definition: A factor that is used to proportion the total acceptable level of a contaminant for a single source of exposure. • If a proportion of the acceptable level for a contaminant is not considered, the compounding of exposure from various sources would result in an unacceptable daily exposure. • Sources of exposure to consider: oral, dermal or inhalation. • For oral exposure consideration would be for water, food (various types) and supplements. • Example default source contributions are food (80%) and water (20%) when air sources are known to be minimal or insignificant.

  14. Source Contribution - How could you determine a source contribution for dietary supplements for a contaminant as a proportion of total daily exposure? • Weight? • Example: 2 g DS / 3 kg food +2 kg water = 0.04 % • Volume? • Same result. • Base it on exposure levels, when known? • Subtract each known source of exposure from the “safe” level. • Safe level – oral – dermal – inhalation Limitations: would you use averages? 90, 95, 99 percentile? Which population(s)? Are data available? The “safe” level for heavy metals is either “0” or very low.

  15. Source Contribution – Why did we use 10% ? • Most risk values are good to one significant figure (chromium, cadmium and mercury) and 10% of the daily total would result in a numerically insignificant exposure. • Other established source contributions are 80% food and 20% water, and we felt that dietary supplements should contribute less than the amount allowed for food and water while at the same time not be too restrictive. • Contaminant levels should be set so they provide protection based on human health endpoints.

More Related