PubMed2006
Regulatory policies designed to reduce the health risk of environmental and/or synthetic chemicals generally aim for zero or negligible levels. Foods, on the other hand, especially those with a long history in the human diet, have been treated as essentially safe, even though they too contain various chemicals including nutrients. The recent debate on the presence in food of acrylamide, a possible human carcinogen, is likely to shake up the traditional paradigm held by regulatory agencies on chemical health risks. The current stance on the safety of acrylamide in food seems to be an extension of the traditional approach to assessment of environmental and/or synthetic chemicals. However, even foods which have long been a part of the human diet contain components that do not necessarily meet the safety margins applied to environmental and/or synthetic chemicals. In the future, a greater understanding of the effect of these agents on biological systems as well as the development of analytical methods for testing will result in many questions being raised concerning chemicals in foods, such as acrylamide which is under scrutiny today. Regulatory policies currently employ various standards for controlling chemical risk. These standards are dependent upon the labeling of the chemical in question, e.g., whether carcinogenic or non-carcinogenic, synthetic or natural, or whether a food or industrial chemical. Regardless of labeling, all chemicals to which we are exposed should be evaluated on an equal footing. Then, according to the level of the identified health risk, regulations could or could not be applied based on local circumstances, e.g., public acceptance, voluntary risk vs. involuntary risk, etc. In order to create a standardized system for chemical risk assessment, the introduction of uniform measures is essential. Loss of life expectancy (LLE) is one possible measure to assess chemical health risk. When LLE has been used, animal toxicity data have indicated that an ad libitum diet intake has considerably more impact on health risk than the acrylamide concentration of the ingested food. Reassessing the health effects of chemicals with a system of uniform measures could reveal many risks that need to be preferentially addressed above and beyond keeping minor toxicants to zero or negligible levels. Recognition of such risks may result in changes that conflict with existing regulations. In any case, whether consciously or unconsciously, people have always been exposed to a certain degree of chemical risk in their daily life. Based on the premise that the public can accept some degree of chemical risk in balance with other risks in their lives, regulatory bodies should be able to take a flexible and effective approach. In order to efficiently and comprehensively maximize the protection of our health against potential harm from chemicals using limited public resources, it is now time for regulatory agencies to restructure their policy frameworks across categories for controlling chemical health risks.