Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,080

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 216 of the 216 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Scientific Opinion on Lead in Food

Open access
EFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM)·2010·EFSA Journal

Abstract

Abstract Lead occurs primarily in the inorganic form in the environment. Human exposure is mainly via food and water, with some via air, dust and soil. In average adult consumers, lead dietary exposure ranges from 0.36 to 1.24, up to 2.43 µg/kg body weight (b.w.) per day in high consumers in Europe. Exposure of infants ranges from 0.21 to 0.94 µg/kg b.w. per day and in children from 0.80 to 3.10 (average consumers), up to 5.51 (high consumers) µg/kg b.w. per day. Cereal products contribute most to dietary lead exposure, while dust and soil can be important non‐dietary sources in children. Lead is absorbed more in children than in adults and accumulates in soft tissues and, over time, in bones. Half‐lives of lead in blood and bone are approximately 30 days and 10 30 years, respectively, and excretion is primarily in urine and faeces. The Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM Panel) identified developmental neurotoxicity in young children and cardiovascular effects and nephrotoxicity in adults as the critical effects for the risk assessment. The respective BMDLs derived from blood lead levels in µg/L (corresponding dietary intake values in µg/kg b.w. per day) were: developmental neurotoxicity BMDL01, 12 (0.50); effects on systolic blood pressure BMDL01, 36 (1.50); effects on prevalence of chronic kidney disease BMDL10, 15 (0.63). The CONTAM Panel concluded that the current PTWI of 25 μg/kg b.w. is no longer appropriate as there is no evidence for a threshold for critical lead‐induced effects. In adults, children and infants the margins of exposures were such that the possibility of an effect from lead in some consumers, particularly in children from 1–7 years of age, cannot be excluded. Protection of children against the potential risk of neurodevelopmental effects would be protective for all other adverse effects of lead, in all populations.

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 · 10.2903/j.efsa.2010.1570

Cites

216 of 216 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 216 references

Cited by

See all 1,080

Metadata

Authors
(CONTAM), E. P. O. C. I. T. F. C.
Venue
EFSA Journal
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-04
Volume
8
Issue
4
ISSN
1831-4732 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4211250424
Cited by
1,080
References
216
FWCI
18.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: Scientific Opinion on Lead in Food. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2903/j.efsa.2010.1570
The paper
(CONTAM), E. P. O. C. I. T. F. C. (2010). Scientific Opinion on Lead in Food. EFSA Journal. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2010.1570

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.