• Archives

  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 21,923 other followers

  • Instagram

    There was an error retrieving images from Instagram. An attempt will be remade in a few minutes.

Is Acrylamide a Reproductive Toxicant?

Under California’s Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (Proposition 65), the state is required to maintain a list of chemical substances known to the state to cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive harm.  The California Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has recently proposed that acrylamide, a Proposition 65 listed chemical carcinogen produced during the cooking of certain foods, should also be listed as a reproductive toxicant.

Since its discovery by the Swedes in 2002, acrylamide is known to form naturally in many starchy foods when they are fried, roasted, or toasted at high temperatures in the Maillard Browning Reaction, in which glucose and fructose react mainly with the amino acid asparagine.  For acrylamide as a carcinogen, a No Significant Risk Level (NSRL) of 0.2 micrograms per day had previously been established by the state of California as the average daily intake a consumer could be exposed to under Proposition 65 without giving a cancer warning on the product label.  The February 26, 2010 OEHHA document further proposes a “Maximum Allowable Dose Level” (MADL) for acrylamide of 140 micrograms a day, and OEHHA is seeking public comments on the proposed listing and MADL by April 27, 2010.

OEHHA has concluded that based on a number of animal studies, “the evidence is sufficient for listing acrylamide as known to cause reproductive toxicity by the authoritative bodies mechanism.”  The U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and the U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP) are the two designated authoritative bodies that OEHHA is using as the formal basis for the proposed listing.  In addition, OEHHA believes that the evidence for acrylamide considered by these two bodies meets the “sufficient evidence” criterion.

What might be the regulatory and labelling impact to food companies and consumers if acrylamide is eventually added to the list of reproductive toxicants?  Even the highest consumers of acrylamide in the U.S. FDA’s exposure assessment (0.4 micrograms per kilogram body weight per day, or about 30 micrograms per day in the entire diet) would take in levels that are more than four times below the proposed MADL (140 micrograms per day).  Consequently, the daily consumption of no one food or beverage containing acrylamide could ever exceed the proposed MADL or require a reproductive toxicity warning label.  In addition, there are no adverse reproductive toxicity effects from acrylamide exposure that have ever been demonstrated to occur in humans.  Such effects have only been shown in very high-dose animal experiments.  Therefore, the acrylamide intakes to which consumers are exposed in their daily diets are thousands of times lower than the high doses producing adverse effects in animals, so there is a very wide safety margin for reproductive toxicity from acrylamide intake in the human diet. Therefore, there appears to be no California product labeling requirement and no regulatory impact for companies from the addition of acrylamide as a reproductive toxicant.

James CoughlinJames Coughlin
Coughlin & Associate

Quick Q&A on Acrylamide:

Q.  If acrylamide becomes listed as a reproductive toxicant, does this change how it is handled as a listed carcinogen in foods?

A.  No, the carcinogen and reproductive toxicant requirements under Proposition 65 are independent.  Listing as a reproductive toxicant will not alter the acrylamide cancer warnings currently being given for French fries in California.

Q.  Should consumers avoid foods containing trace levels of acrylamide because of possible reproductive harm?

A.  No, the reproductive effects are only seen in high-dose animal testing and will not occur in humans because consumers are exposed to acrylamide intakes so much lower than the test animals.

Q.  Just to be safe, shouldn’t I simply avoid acrylamide-containing foods?

A.  No, acrylamide is found at trace levels in foods making up about 40% of a person’s daily calorie intake, and all of these foods are part of a regular healthy diet.  The FDA and other public health advisory bodies around the world urge consumers to eat a balanced diet as part of a healthy eating plan.

4 Responses

  1. Top ten carcinogenic foods and according to the FDA ACRYLAMIDE is produced industrially for the use in products such as plastics, Grouts, water treatment products,and cosmetics. Acrylamide is also in cigarettes both foods and cigarettes have an impact on heart disease, it is logical to assume the leaching impact of fast foods (especially the sugar containing drinks) would have such a negative impact to strip the body of its ordinary resources and its natural immunity is thus not unreasonable to assume that smoking on its own may have a much less significant impact on a person’s health. However, when a smoker’s diet contains large amounts of carcinogens (as found in fast food) the likelihood of cancer overtakes the likelihood of heart disease. An example would be an active person who drinks a liter of Coke each day, and otherwise lives on hamburgers and fries. Even a healthy lifestyle would not negate the leaching impact of this particular diet. It has also been demonstrated that while vegans are healthy and can absorb sufficient quantities of protein, once sodas are added to this diet, minerals and vitamins are easily leached away to critical levels, leading to anemia. It is a paradox of the high protein western diet that the leaching impact of sodas to some extent drain the body of the excess protein intake. While it is in the interests of the human body to lower our intake of meats, sugars and junk food, it is also in the interests of the planet. Hamburgers are related to high energy crops (maize is fed to chickens and cattle) and deformity (forests are cut down for farm cattle or maize or both).Human beings are making themselves sick, and ruining their environment. We are at a precipice. Can a smoker who is addicted convince him or herself to give up their suicidal habits? Can we change our eating habits now that we know they’re killing us and our world? Every bite, every sip, is a choice. Please join me in making the habit of feeding ourselves something more natural – our diets ought to nourish and enhance our lives. Acrylamdic caused cancer in aniamal studys where animals were exposed to acrylamdic at very high doses. Acrylamidic caused nerve damage in people expose to very high levels at work. Farm rasied fish products contain high amounts of PCB. If one considerd the list above its not hard to reach the following conclusion. Nerve Damage is any Nerurological disease.

  2. Hi, Nice post!

    I really like it especially the part “Therefore, the acrylamide intakes to which consumers are exposed in their daily diets are thousands of times lower than the high doses producing adverse effects in animals, so there is a very wide safety margin for reproductive toxicity from acrylamide intake in the human diet. ”

    I will surely reading your other posts.

  3. Great post. Thanks for explaining it. I learned a lot.

  4. of course when you dont have time to cook, fastfoods would always be the best option `-“

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: