NGO's turn to EPA to push mercury standard that would counter FDA advice to eat fish
SEAFOODNEWS.COM [Risk Policy Report] by Maria Hegstad Sept. 30, 2014
EPA is facing calls from observers to consider pursuing a holistic risk-benefit calculus to project the estimated risks to the public from exposure to methylmercury (MeHg), in lieu of the agency's plan to update its 13-year old Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) assessment of the substance that the public is exposed to by eating otherwise beneficial seafood.
During a recent EPA National Forum on Contaminants in Fish in Alexandria, VA, a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) official suggested that a broader "net effects" approach could be more useful to the agency than a traditional reference dose (RfD) -- the maximum amount of a substance that EPA estimates can be ingested daily over a lifetime without associated adverse health effects occurring.
"If you use a net effects approach, do you even need" an RfD, asked Tony Lowery, the program coordinator for NOAA's National Seafood Inspection Laboratory, speaking at the EPA forum.
Ned Groth, a retired Consumer Reports toxicologist who consults for advocacy groups on mercury and seafood issues, asked, "Is it even practical to set a new RfD? Or [is it better to] take a second approach?"
In response to the suggestions, Vincent Cogliano -- acting director of EPA's IRIS program -- said the agency is pushing ahead with its planned update...
To Read Full Story Login Below.