Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 209

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Exposure of an Adult Population to Perfluorinated Substances Using Duplicate Diet Portions and Biomonitoring Data

Fromme, Hermann, Schlummer, Martin, Möller, Angela, Gruber, Ludwig, Wolz, Gerd, Ungewiss, Jan, Böhmer, Sigrun, Dekant, Wolfgang, Mayer, Richard, Liebl, Bernhard, Twardella, Dorothee·2007·Environmental Science & Technology

Abstract

Because dietary intake is supposed to be an important route of human exposure we quantified the dietary intake of perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), perfluorooctanoate (PFOA), perfluorohexane sulfonate (PFHxS), perfluorohexanoate (PFHxA), and perfluorooctane sulfonamide (PFOSA) using 214 duplicate diet samples. The study was carried out with a study population of 15 female and 16 male healthy subjects aged 16-45 years. The participants collected daily duplicate diet samples over seven consecutive days in 2005. Duplicate samples were homogenized and their ultrasonic extracts were cleaned up by SPE and subjected to HPLC-ESI-MS/MS. In addition, individual intakes were estimated based on blood levels of PFOS and PFOA using a pharmacokinetic model. Blood samples were collected once during the sampling period. The median (90th percentile) daily dietary intake of PFOS and PFOA was 1.4 ng/kg b.w. (3.8 ng/kg b.w.) and 2.9 ng/kg b.w. (8.4 ng/kg b.w.), respectively. PFHxS and PFHxA could be detected only in some samples above detection limit with median (maximum) daily intakes of 2.0 ng/kg b.w. (4.0 ng/kg b.w.) and 4.3 ng/kg b.w. (9.2 ng/kg b.w.), respectively. Because PFOSA could not be detected above the limit of detection of 0.2 ng/g f.w. this indirect route of exposure seems to be of less significance. Overall, the results of this study demonstrate that the German population is exposed to PFOS and PFOA, but the median dietary intake did not reach the recommended tolerable daily intake by far. Biomonitoring data predict an exposure in a comparable range. We suppose that, normally, food intake is the main source of exposure of the general population to PFOS and PFOA.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/es071244n

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 209

Metadata

Authors
Fromme, H., Schlummer, M., Möller, A., Gruber, L., Wolz, G., Ungewiss, J., Böhmer, S., Dekant, W., Mayer, R., Liebl, B., & Twardella, D.
Venue
Environmental Science & Technology
Published
2007-10-18
Volume
41
Issue
22
Pages
7928-7933
ISSN
  • 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5851
OpenAlex
W2076100364
Cited by
209
References
1
FWCI
15.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Exposure of an Adult Population to Perfluorinated Substances Using Duplicate Diet Portions and Biomonitoring Data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1021/es071244n
The paper
Fromme, H., Schlummer, M., Möller, A., Gruber, L., Wolz, G., Ungewiss, J., Böhmer, S., Dekant, W., Mayer, R., Liebl, B., & Twardella, D. (2007). Exposure of an Adult Population to Perfluorinated Substances Using Duplicate Diet Portions and Biomonitoring Data. Environmental Science & Technology. https://doi.org/10.1021/es071244n

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.