Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Uncertainties in the reference dose for methylmercury.

M L Dourson1, A E Wullenweber, K A Poirier

  • 1Toxicology Excellence for Risk Assessment, Cincinnati, OH 45223, USA. dourson@tera.org

Neurotoxicology
|January 5, 2002
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Consideration of Carcinogenicity and Mode of Action Information by an Independent Expert Panel to Support Derivation of No-Significant-Risk-Level Values for Vinyl Acetate Monomer.

Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP·2026
Same author

The effect of various seleno-compounds on ehrlich ascites tumor cells.

Biological trace element research·2013
Same author

Genetic polymorphisms in assessing interindividual variability in delivered dose.

Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP·2002
Same author

Determination of an acute no-observed-adverse-effect level (NOAEL) for copper in water.

Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP·2001
Same author

Using human data to protect the public's health.

Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP·2001
Same author

Applications of mechanistic data in risk assessment: the past, present, and future.

Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology·2001
Same journal

Urinary Volatile Organic Compound Metabolites and Depressive Symptoms Among U.S. Adults With Cardiovascular-Kidney-Metabolic Syndrome Stages 0-3: NHANES-Based Associations and In Silico Multi-Omics Insights.

Neurotoxicology·2026
Same journal

PM<sub>2.5</sub>-bound organophosphate esters and childhood attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder symptoms: A population-based study from China.

Neurotoxicology·2026
Same journal

Paternal Exposure to Chlorpyrifos Disrupts Protein Regulation and Abolishes PKCβ Signaling in Learning‑Related Neural Circuits.

Neurotoxicology·2026
Same journal

Zebrafish Behavioral Assessment as a First-Tier Whole-Organism NAM for Developmental Neurotoxicity: A Multi-Laboratory Evaluation.

Neurotoxicology·2026
Same journal

Adolescent prefrontal and amygdala molecular signatures of perinatal morphine versus buprenorphine exposure in mice.

Neurotoxicology·2026
Same journal

A multiparametric 3D cortical neurosphere NAM for developmental neurotoxicity: Chlorpyrifos and a biomonitoring-anchored PFAS mixture.

Neurotoxicology·2026
See all related articles

This study analyzes the methylmercury Reference Dose (RfD), questioning the chosen critical study and uncertainty factors (UFs). Further research is recommended to improve the RfD

Area of Science:

  • Environmental toxicology
  • Risk assessment
  • Methylmercury toxicity

Background:

  • Critically examines the National Academy of Sciences and National Research Council report on methylmercury.
  • Evaluates the US Environmental Protection Agency's Reference Dose (RfD) for methylmercury.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To scrutinize the selection of the critical study for the methylmercury RfD.
  • To analyze the assumptions and uncertainty factors (UFs) used in RfD derivation.
  • To compare UFs used by different agencies.

Main Methods:

  • Critical analysis of toxicological data and RfD methodology.
  • Examination of uncertainty factor selection and rationale.
  • Comparative review of UF approaches across organizations.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • Identifies concerns regarding the critical study choice and UF assumptions in the current methylmercury RfD.
  • Highlights variability and rationale behind UF selection by different bodies.
  • Suggests specific research to reduce uncertainty in UF application.

Conclusions:

  • The current methylmercury RfD may lack precision due to chosen critical study and UF assumptions.
  • Further research can refine UF selection, potentially leading to a more accurate RfD.
  • Database completeness could enable a UF of unity, enhancing RfD precision.