{"title":"The relative nature of the standards for proof of safety: a review of FDA’s safety standards for various consumer products","authors":"George A. Burdock, Erik Hedrick","doi":"10.1007/s00204-024-03816-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Are all food ingredients, dietary supplement ingredients and even foods, required to meet the same safety standards? Are they all equally safe? If so, then why do the various categories have different expressions describing their safety, such as “reasonable <i>certainty</i> of no harm” for food ingredients and “reasonable <i>expectation</i> of no harm” for dietary supplement ingredients? The basis for these different expressions is that they are not standards of safety, but <i>standards of proof</i> of safety. Just as in criminal vs. civil courts, the threshold for proving guilt or fault is different, so too are there differences between various categories of consumer products regulated by the US Food and Drug Administration. This manuscript describes the threshold requirements for each standard, as well as to the identity of the decision makers on what is safe, their credentials as decision makers and the databases mandated for their use.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8329,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Toxicology","volume":"98 10","pages":"3209 - 3214"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Toxicology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00204-024-03816-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"TOXICOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Are all food ingredients, dietary supplement ingredients and even foods, required to meet the same safety standards? Are they all equally safe? If so, then why do the various categories have different expressions describing their safety, such as “reasonable certainty of no harm” for food ingredients and “reasonable expectation of no harm” for dietary supplement ingredients? The basis for these different expressions is that they are not standards of safety, but standards of proof of safety. Just as in criminal vs. civil courts, the threshold for proving guilt or fault is different, so too are there differences between various categories of consumer products regulated by the US Food and Drug Administration. This manuscript describes the threshold requirements for each standard, as well as to the identity of the decision makers on what is safe, their credentials as decision makers and the databases mandated for their use.
期刊介绍:
Archives of Toxicology provides up-to-date information on the latest advances in toxicology. The journal places particular emphasis on studies relating to defined effects of chemicals and mechanisms of toxicity, including toxic activities at the molecular level, in humans and experimental animals. Coverage includes new insights into analysis and toxicokinetics and into forensic toxicology. Review articles of general interest to toxicologists are an additional important feature of the journal.