National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

HARDBACK
price:$59.95
add to cart

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

Dietary Supplements: A Framework for Evaluating Safety (2005)
Institute of Medicine (IOM)

Citation Manager

. "5 Categories of Scientific Evidence--Animal Data." Dietary Supplements: A Framework for Evaluating Safety. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2005.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
161
bottomleft bottomright

The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.


Dietary Supplements: A Framework for Evaluating Safety

1988; Kingsbury, 1964). In addition, there are five volumes of proceedings of international symposia on poisonous plants, with particular emphasis on livestock poisonings (Colegate and Dorling, 1994; Garland and Barr, 1998; James et al., 1992; Keeler et al., 1978; Seawright et al., 1985).

Most of the available veterinary toxicology reports are observational and not experimental, and the relevance of various species of livestock to human toxicity is not well established. Nevertheless, veterinary toxicology information may be quite useful when it corroborates concerns raised by other types of data. Independent of other types of data, evidence of harm in livestock and other veterinary toxicology information is appropriate to consider as a signal prompting an initial review of an ingredient. In addition, the veterinary toxicology literature is also useful for generating hypotheses in need of testing in well-established animal models. A careful mechanism for ensuring continuing awareness by FDA of this important data source is suggested.

CONSIDERATIONS FOR ASSESSING ANIMAL DATA

Human Versus Animal Dose

The degree of potential human risk is a function of the nature and seriousness of the observed toxicity and the dose at which it occurs in animals relative to the expected human intake of the substance. One of the unique and powerful approaches of animal testing is the administration of high amounts of a substance over a short time period. This allows the detection of effects with small groups of animals, the prediction of possible effects following prolonged human exposure, and the prediction of possible effects on particularly sensitive human subpopulations. Many animal studies focused on toxicity evaluate increasing dosages until signs of toxicity are seen. While the amount administered may not appear relevant to the non-scientist, organ toxicities at elevated intake in acute or subchronic studies can be indicative of toxicities that may develop at lower doses during chronic use of the ingredient and should therefore not be disregarded simply because the dose administered is higher than that taken by humans. On the other hand, in certain instances, data will indicate that positive animal studies conducted at high doses may falsely predict human outcomes because the excessive doses used in animals overwhelm normal detoxification mechanisms that would protect against toxicity at actual levels of human exposure.

While the assumption should be that any effects observed in animals are relevant to humans, under some circumstances known differences between humans and animals with respect to the pharmacokinetics and metabolism of a substance, interspecies differences in pharmacodynamics, or

Page
161
Front Matter (R1-R20)
Executive Summary (1-18)
1 Introduction and Background (19-42)
2 Approaches Used by Others and Existing Safety Frameworks (43-84)
3 The Framework (85-125)
4 Categories of Scientific Evidence--Human Information and Data (126-155)
5 Categories of Scientific Evidence--Animal Data (156-174)
6 Categories of Scientific Evidence--Information About Related Substances (175-216)
7 Categories of Scientific Evidence--In Vitro Data (217-234)
8 Interactions (235-246)
9 Vulnerable Groups and Prevalance of Use (247-252)
10 Scientific Principles for Integrating and Evaluating the Available Data (253-268)
11 Applying the Framework: Case Studies Using the Prototype Safety Monographs (269-291)
12 Factors Influencing Use of the Safety Framework (292-296)
13 Findings and Recommendations (297-306)
Appendix A: Existing Frameworks or Systems for Evaluating the Safety of Other Substances (307-315)
Appendix B: Scope of Work and Comments to Initial July 2002 Framework (316-321)
Appendix C: Plant Family Information (322-355)
Appendix D: Chaparral: Prototype Monograph Summary (356-362)
Appendix E: Glucosamine: Prototype Monograph Summary (363-366)
Appendix F: Melatonin: Prototype Monograph Summary (367-371)
Appendix G: Chromium Picolinate: Prototype Monograph Summary (372-375)
Appendix H: Saw Palmetto: Prototype Monograph Summary (376-379)
Appendix I: Shark Cartilage: Prototype Monograph Summary (380-384)
Appendix J: Prototype Focused Monograph: Review of Liver-Related Risks for Chaparral (385-449)
Appendix K: Protoype Focused Monograph: Review of Anti-Androgenic Risks of Saw Palmetto Ingestion by Women (450-477)
Appendix L: Acknowledgements (478-480)
Appendix M: Biographical Sketches of Commitee Members (481-488)
Index (489-506)