Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2010;73(2):114-27.
doi: 10.1080/15287390903337100.

Essentiality and toxicity in copper health risk assessment: overview, update and regulatory considerations

Affiliations
Review

Essentiality and toxicity in copper health risk assessment: overview, update and regulatory considerations

Bonnie Ransom Stern. J Toxicol Environ Health A. 2010.

Abstract

Copper (Cu), an essential element required as a cofactor and/or structural component of numerous metalloenzymes, is uniquely positioned as a case study for issues associated with the essential metals health risk assessment, because of its extensive database. Essential elements pose distinct challenges when establishing regulatory guidelines because too little as well as too much intake can produce adverse health consequences and the dose-response curve is roughly U-shaped. Thus, conventional health risk assessment paradigms do not apply to essential elements; the dose-response assessment needs to define an acceptable range of oral intake (AROI) which prevents deficiency by meeting nutritional requirements while avoiding toxicity due to high intakes. The conceptual framework for this type of risk assessment includes consideration of biological processes that are unique to essential elements-homeostasis, basal and normative nutritional requirements, bioavailability, and nutrient-nutrient interactions. In this paper, the Cu database on physiology, deficiency, and excess is briefly reviewed in order to establish the range of potential health hazards associated with varying levels of intake. Issues discussed include the (1) development of suitable dose-response methodologies, including appropriate dose and response metrics, for Cu; (2) categorization of severity of response and functional significance; (3) use of endpoints of similar severity and functionality for deficiency and excess in dose-response assessment; (4) development of valid biomarkers for subclinical effects, exposures and susceptibilities. Guideline values for Cu intake have been established by nutritional and toxicologic regulatory or advisory boards. Although regulators are more concerned with the potential human toxicity arising from excessive Cu intake, the preponderance of evidence suggests that deficiency is more of a public health concern than excess.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

  • Toxicity of copper in drinking water.
    Brewer GJ. Brewer GJ. J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev. 2010 Aug;13(6):449-52; author reply 453-9. doi: 10.1080/10937404.2010.499732. J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev. 2010. PMID: 20711927 No abstract available.

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources