IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v13y1993i3p355-364.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Re‐evaluation of the Reference Dose for Methylmercury and Assessment of Current Exposure Levels

Author

Listed:
  • Alan H. Stern

Abstract

Methylmercury (Me‐Hg) is widely distributed through freshwater and saltwater food chains and human consumption of fish and shellfish has lead to widespread exposure. Both the U.S. EPA Reference Dose (0.3 μg/kg/day) and the FAO/WHO Permissible Tolerable Weekly Intake (3.3 μg/kg/week) are currently based on the prevention of paraesthesia in adult and older children. However, Me‐Hg exposure in utero is known to result in a range of developmental neurologic effects including clinical CNS symptoms and delayed onset of walking. Based on a critical review of developmental toxicity data from human and animal studies, it is concluded that current guidelines for the prevention of paraesthesia are not adequate to address developmental effects. A dose of 0.07 μ/kg/day is suggested as the best estimate of a potential reference dose for developmental effects. Data on nationwide fish consumption rates and Me‐Hg levels in fish/seafood weighted by proportion of the catch intended for human consumption are analyzed in a Monte Carlo simulation to derive a probability distribution of background Me‐Hg exposure. While various uncertainties in the toxicologic and exposure data limit the precision with which health risk can be estimated, this analysis suggests that at current levels of Me‐Hg exposure, a significant fraction of women of childbearing age have exposures above this suggested reference dose.

Suggested Citation

  • Alan H. Stern, 1993. "Re‐evaluation of the Reference Dose for Methylmercury and Assessment of Current Exposure Levels," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(3), pages 355-364, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:13:y:1993:i:3:p:355-364
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1993.tb01087.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1993.tb01087.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1993.tb01087.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ronald L. Iman & Jon C. Helton, 1988. "An Investigation of Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analysis Techniques for Computer Models," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(1), pages 71-90, March.
    2. Kimberly M. Thompson & David E. Burmaster & Edmund A.C. Crouch3, 1992. "Monte Carlo Techniques for Quantitative Uncertainty Analysis in Public Health Risk Assessments," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(1), pages 53-63, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wout Slob, 1994. "Uncertainty Analysis in Multiplicative Models," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(4), pages 571-576, August.
    2. Victor R. Vasquez & Wallace B. Whiting, 2005. "Accounting for Both Random Errors and Systematic Errors in Uncertainty Propagation Analysis of Computer Models Involving Experimental Measurements with Monte Carlo Methods," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(6), pages 1669-1681, December.
    3. Andrew E. Smith & P. Barry Ryan & John S. Evans, 1992. "The Effect of Neglecting Correlations When Propagating Uncertainty and Estimating the Population Distribution of Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(4), pages 467-474, December.
    4. A. E. Ades & Karl Claxton & Mark Sculpher, 2006. "Evidence synthesis, parameter correlation and probabilistic sensitivity analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(4), pages 373-381, April.
    5. S. Cucurachi & E. Borgonovo & R. Heijungs, 2016. "A Protocol for the Global Sensitivity Analysis of Impact Assessment Models in Life Cycle Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(2), pages 357-377, February.
    6. Christopher Dickey & Regina M. Santella & Dale Hattis & Deliang Tang & Yanzhi Hsu & Tom Cooper & Tie‐Lan Young & Frederica P. Perera, 1997. "Variability in PAH‐DNA Adduct Measurements in Peripheral Mononuclear Cells: Implications for Quantitative Cancer Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(5), pages 649-656, October.
    7. Brent Finley & Deborah Proctor & Paul Scott & Natalie Harrington & Dennis Paustenbach & Paul Price, 1994. "Recommended Distributions for Exposure Factors Frequently Used in Health Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(4), pages 533-553, August.
    8. Maged M. Hamed & Philip B. Bedient, 1997. "On the Effect of Probability Distributions of Input Variables in Public Health Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(1), pages 97-105, February.
    9. Hou, Tianfeng & Nuyens, Dirk & Roels, Staf & Janssen, Hans, 2019. "Quasi-Monte Carlo based uncertainty analysis: Sampling efficiency and error estimation in engineering applications," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    10. Lee, Sang-Hee & Park, Cheol-Min, 2022. "The effect of hunter-wild boar interactions and landscape heterogeneity on wild boar population size: A simulation study," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 464(C).
    11. Shabbir Ahmed Osmani & Foysol Mahmud, 2021. "An integrated approach of machine algorithms with multi-objective optimization in performance analysis of event detection," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 1976-1993, February.
    12. Emanuele Borgonovo & Gordon B. Hazen & Elmar Plischke, 2016. "A Common Rationale for Global Sensitivity Measures and Their Estimation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(10), pages 1871-1895, October.
    13. Nicolas A. Menzies & Brian W. Allwood & Anna S. Dean & Pete J. Dodd & Rein M. G. J. Houben & Lyndon P. James & Gwenan M. Knight & Jamilah Meghji & Linh N. Nguyen & Andrea Rachow & Samuel G. Schumacher, 2023. "Global burden of disease due to rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis: a mathematical modeling analysis," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-9, December.
    14. Frédéric Dor & Pascal Empereur‐Bissonnet & Denis Zmirou & Vincent Nedellec & Jean‐Marie Haguenoer & Frans Jongeneelen & Alain Person & William Dab & Colin Ferguson, 2003. "Validation of Multimedia Models Assessing Exposure to PAHs—The SOLEX Study," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(5), pages 1047-1057, October.
    15. K. Claxton & P. J. Neumannn & S. S. Araki & M. C. Weinstein, "undated". "Bayesian Value-of-Information Analysis: An Application to a Policy Model of Alzheimer's Disease," Discussion Papers 00/39, Department of Economics, University of York.
    16. Julia J. Pet‐Armacost & Jose Sepulveda & Milton Sakude, 1999. "Monte Carlo Sensitivity Analysis of Unknown Parameters in Hazardous Materials Transportation Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(6), pages 1173-1184, December.
    17. Alison C. Cullen, 1994. "Measures of Compounding Conservatism in Probabilistic Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(4), pages 389-393, August.
    18. Michael Greenberg & Charles Haas & Anthony Cox & Karen Lowrie & Katherine McComas & Warner North, 2012. "Ten Most Important Accomplishments in Risk Analysis, 1980–2010," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(5), pages 771-781, May.
    19. James K. Hammitt, 1990. "Subjective‐Probability‐Based Scenarios for Uncertain Input Parameters: Stratospheric Ozone Depletion," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(1), pages 93-102, March.
    20. Yizhen Wang & Menglei Cui & Jiong Guo & Han Zhang & Yingjie Wu & Fu Li, 2023. "Decay Branch Ratio Sampling Method with Dirichlet Distribution," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-17, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:13:y:1993:i:3:p:355-364. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.