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
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Taniyasu, S., Kannan, K., So, M. K., Gulkowska, A., Sinclair, E., Okazawa, T., & Yamashita, N. (2005) · Journal of Chromatography A · doi:10.1016/j.chroma.2005.07.053 · Cited by 602
Cited by
De Silva, A. O., Armitage, J. M., Bruton, T. A., Dassuncao, C., Heiger-Bernays, W., Hu, X. C., Kärrman, A., Kelly, B., Ng, C., Robuck, A., et al. (2020) · Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry · doi:10.1002/etc.4935 · Cited by 835
Toxicology of perfluorinated compounds
Stahl, T., Mattern, D., & Brunn, H. (2011) · Environmental Sciences Europe · doi:10.1186/2190-4715-23-38 · Cited by 432
Haug, L. S., Huber, S., Becher, G., & Thomsen, C. (2011) · Environment International · doi:10.1016/j.envint.2011.01.011 · Cited by 391
From cohorts to molecules: adverse impacts of endocrine disrupting mixtures
Caporale, N., Leemans, M., Birgersson, L., Germain, P.-L., Cheroni, C., Borbély, G., Engdahl, E., Lindh, C., Bressan, R. B., Cavallo, F., et al. (2022) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.abe8244 · Cited by 368
Poothong, S., Papadopoulou, E., Padilla-Sánchez, J. A., Thomsen, C., & Haug, L. S. (2020) · Environment International · doi:10.1016/j.envint.2019.105244 · Cited by 357
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
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- 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
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.