Abstract
An important and yet perhaps controversial issue that comes up in attempts to establish ‘safe’ or ‘tolerable’ levels for human exposure to chemical constituents relates to the notion of an ‘acceptable chemical exposure level’ (ACEL). The ACEL may be considered as the concentration of a chemical in a particular medium or product that, when exceeded, presents significant risk of adverse impact to potential receptors. In fact, in a number of situations, the ACEL concept tends to drive the public health risk management decision made about several consumer products. However, the ACELs may not always result in ‘safe’ or ‘tolerable’ risk levels per se—in part due to the nature of the critical exposure scenarios, receptor-specific factors, and other conditions that are specific to the particular hazard situation. Under such circumstances, and insofar as possible, it becomes necessary to develop more stringent and health-protective levels that will meet the ‘safe’ or ‘tolerable’ risk level criteria.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Suggested Reading
Beck, L. W., Maki, A. W., Artman, N. R., & Wilson, E. R. (1981). Outline and criteria for evaluating the safety of new chemicals. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 1, 19–58.
Bowers, T. S., Shifrin, N. S., & Murphy, B. L. (1996). Statistical approach to meeting soil cleanup goals. Environmental Science and Technology, 30(5), 1437–1444.
Enander, R. T. (2014). Carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons: an analysis of screening values, guidelines, and standards in the Northeast. Risk Analysis, 34(11), 2035–2052.
FDA. (1994). Action levels for poisonous or deleterious substances in human food and animal feed. Washington, DC: US Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
Ginevan, M. E., & Splitstone, D. E. (1997). Improving remediation decisions at hazardous waste sites with risk-based geostatistical analysis. Environmental Science and Technology, 31(2), 92A–96A.
Krewski, D., Brown, C., & Murdoch, D. (1984). Determining safe levels of exposure: Safety factors for mathematical models. Fundamental and Applied Toxicology, 4, S383–S394.
Lu, F. C. (1988). Acceptable daily intake: Inception, evolution, and application. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 8, 45–60.
NRC. (1996). Linking science and technology to society’s environmental goals. Washington, DC: National Forum on Science and Technology Goals: Environment, National Research Council (NRC), National Academy Press.
Watson, D. H. (Ed.). (1998). Natural toxicants in food. Boca Raton: CRC Press LLC.
Wolt, J. D. (1999). Exposure endpoint selection in acute dietary risk assessment. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 29(3), 279–286.
Bibliography
van Veen, M. P. (1996). A general model for exposure and uptake from consumer products. Risk Analysis, 16(3), 331–338.
Vermeire, T. G., van der Poel, P., van de Laar, R., & Roelfzema, H. (1993). Estimation of consumer exposure to chemicals: application of simple models. Science of the Total Environment, 135, 155–176.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Asante-Duah, K. (2017). Determination of ‘Acceptable’ and ‘Safe’ Levels for Human Exposure to Chemicals. In: Public Health Risk Assessment for Human Exposure to Chemicals. Environmental Pollution, vol 27. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-1039-6_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-1039-6_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-024-1037-2
Online ISBN: 978-94-024-1039-6
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)