US EPA Deceptions: The Food Supply is Safe/Current Levels of Dioxin Exposure Not Harmful
News Release
For Immediate Release 4/17/12
Cancer Action NY
Donald L. Hassig, Director
315.262.2456
_______________________________________________________________________
The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published “Reanalysis of Key Issues Related to Dioxin Toxicity and Response to NAS Comments” in February of 2012. EPA sets forth a non-carcinogenic effects chronic oral reference dose for dioxin in this document. Those who consume average quantities of animal fats receive dioxin exposures in excess of the oral reference dose.
Cancer Action NY submitted the following questions to the agency for the purpose of determining EPA’s position on the implications of the new oral reference dose to matters of public health protection. EPA provided answers which avoid the fact that animal fat consumption imposes exposures in excess of the oral reference dose. The 0.6 picogram dioxin TEQ/kg bw/day exposure estimate is for per capita exposure. Dioxin exposures for those who consume average quantities of animal fats are higher than per capita exposure because per capita exposure is an average including those who consume animal fats and those who do not. It is clear from the answers found below that EPA continues to use its governmental powers to deceive Americans on the subject of dioxin contamination of the food supply and disease risk. EPA does this because the chemical and food corporations oppose telling Americans the truth about food supply contamination.
1. What does EPA estimate to be the current quantity of dioxin exposure for those who consume average quantities of animal fat?
Estimated average adult dioxin exposures in the U.S. are slightly lower than the dioxin reference dose (RfD). A recent study estimates U.S. average background dioxin exposures to be about 0.6 pg TEQ/kg-day. The RfD is 0.7 pg/kg-day.
2. In the 2003 draft of the agency’s dioxin reassessment a per capita exposure value of 1.0 pg dioxin TEQ/kg bw/day was set forth. EPA later recalculated exposure using the same data but assigning no detects a value of zero rather than one half the limit of detection as was done in the calculation which produced the exposure value stated above. The recalculation produced an exposure value of 0.6 pg dioxin TEQ/kg bw/day. In the paper which presented the recalculated exposure value the statement is found that the recalculated value should not be viewed as evidence that dioxin exposure had decreased. Considering the fact that assigning no detects a value of one half the limit of detection is a well established practice for producing estimates of dioxin concentrations, is it fair to state that per capita dioxin exposure is approximately 1.0 pg dioxin TEQ/kg bw/day?
Estimated average adult dioxin exposures in the U.S. are slightly lower than the dioxin reference dose (RfD). A recent study estimates U.S. average background dioxin exposures to be about 0.6 pg TEQ/kg-day. The RfD is 0.7 pg/kg-day.
3. Are a considerable number of Americans receiving dioxin exposures in excess of the chronic oral reference dose?
Most Americans have low-level exposure to dioxins. Most dioxin exposure occurs through the diet with small amounts of exposure coming from breathing air containing trace amounts of dioxins and from inadvertent ingestion of soil containing dioxins. While we all likely have some level of dioxin in our bodies, the levels are low and findings show that low-levels of exposure do not pose a significant health risk.
4. What damages to health occur at exposures in excess of the oral reference dose?
Exceeding the RfD for one day, or a week or more does not necessarily means that an individual has a greater risk of health effects. Constant exposure at higher doses than the RfD are more of a cause for concern. However, it is not possible to determine an exact dose where adverse effects will start to occur. Nor is it possible to determine exactly how many days of exposure above the RfD it would take to cause health effects. The derivation of an RfD generally includes scientific assumptions and factors that account for uncertainty. Therefore, it is designed to be public health protective. It is designed to be protective even of sensitive subgroups.
5. Do current levels of food supply contamination impose significant adverse health effects upon those who consume average quantities of animal fat?
The U.S. food supply is one of the safest and most nutritious in the world. Americans should eat a balanced diet and follow the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2010. EPA and its federal partners such as the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. Department of Agriculture do not recommend avoiding any particular foods because of dioxin. Each food group provides important nutrients needed for health.
Donald L. Hassig, Director
Cancer Action NY
Cancer Action News Network
P O Box 340
Colton, NY USA 13625
315.262.2456
