Federal statutes authorize several agencies to protect human populations from chemical emergencies and provide guidance to evacuate, clean, and re-occupy affected areas. Each of the authorized federal agencies have developed programs to provide managers, public health officials, and regulators, with a rapid assessment of potential hazards and risks associated with chemical emergencies. Emergency responses vary based on exposure scenarios, routes, temporal considerations, and the substance(s) present. Traditional chemical assessments and derivation of toxicity values are time-intensive, typically requiring large amounts of human epidemiological and experimental animal data. When a rapid assessment of health effects is needed, an integrated computational approach of augmenting extant toxicity data with in vitro (new alternative toxicity testing methods) data can provide a quick, evidence-based solution. In so doing, multiple streams of data can be used, including literature searches, hazard, dose-response, physicochemical, and environmental fate and transport property data, in vitro cell bioactivity testing and toxicogenomics. The field of toxicology is moving, ever so slowly, towards increased use of this approach as it transforms from observational to predictive science. The challenge is to objectively and transparently derive toxicity values using this approach to protect human health and the environment. Presented here are examples and efforts toward rapid risk assessment that demonstrate unified, parallel, and complementary work to provide timely protection in times of chemical emergency.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to provide baseline estimates of sodium levels in 125 popular, sodium-contributing, commercially processed and restaurant foods in the U.S., to assess future changes as manufacturers reformulate foods. METHODS: In 2010-2013, we obtained ~ 5200 sample units from up to 12 locations and analyzed 1654 composites for sodium and related nutrients (potassium, total dietary fiber, total and saturated fat, and total sugar), as part of the U.S. Department of Agriculture-led sodium-monitoring program. We determined sodium content as mg/100 g, mg/serving, and mg/kcal and compared them against U.S. Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) sodium limits for "low" and "healthy" claims and to the optimal sodium level of < 1.1 mg/kcal, extrapolating from the Healthy Eating Index-2010. RESULTS: Results from this study represent the baseline nutrient values to use in assessing future changes as foods are reformulated for sodium reduction. Sodium levels in over half (69 of 125) of the foods, including all main dishes and most Sentinel Foods from fast-food outlets or restaurants (29 of 33 foods), exceeded the FDA sodium limit for using the claim "healthy". Only 13 of 125 foods had sodium values below 1.1 mg/kcal. We observed a wide range of sodium content among similar food types and brands. CONCLUSIONS: Current sodium levels in commercially processed and restaurant foods in the U.S. are high and variable. Targeted benchmarks and increased awareness of high sodium content and variability in foods would support reduction of sodium intakes in the U.S.

BACKGROUND: Most sodium in the US diet comes from commercially processed and restaurant foods. Sodium reduction in these foods is key to several recent public health efforts. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to provide an overview of a program led by the USDA, in partnership with other government agencies, to monitor sodium contents in commercially processed and restaurant foods in the United States. We also present comparisons of nutrients generated under the program to older data. DESIGN: We track approximately 125 commercially processed and restaurant food items ("sentinel foods") annually using information from food manufacturers and periodically by nationwide sampling and laboratory analyses. In addition, we monitor >1100 other commercially processed and restaurant food items, termed "priority-2 foods" (P2Fs) biennially by using information from food manufacturers. These foods serve as indicators for assessing changes in the sodium content of commercially processed and restaurant foods in the United States. We sampled all sentinel foods nationwide and reviewed all P2Fs in 2010-2013 to determine baseline sodium concentrations. RESULTS: We updated sodium values for 73 sentinel foods and 551 P2Fs in the USDA's National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference (releases 23-26). Sodium values changed by at least 10% for 43 of the sentinel foods, which, for 31 foods, including commonly consumed foods such as bread, tomato catsup, and potato chips, the newer sodium values were lower. Changes in the concentrations of related nutrients (total and saturated fat, total sugar, potassium, or dietary fiber) that were recommended by the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans for reduced or increased consumption accompanied sodium reduction. The results of sodium reduction efforts, based on resampling of the sentinel foods or re-review of P2Fs, will become available beginning in 2015. CONCLUSION: This monitoring program tracks sodium reduction efforts, improves food composition databases, and strengthens national nutrition monitoring.

Toxicologists are often called upon to assist in environmental, industrial, occupational and public health assessments. Accordingly, medical toxicologists may find it prudent to be aware of applicable federal toxicological regulations and reporting requirements and of the roles of relevant federal agencies. These regulations are numerous, complex, and have evolved and expanded over time, making it difficult for toxicologists to sustain a current knowledge base. This article reviews the pertinent federal toxicological reporting requirements with regards to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the Atomic Energy Act (AEA), the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act (EPCRA), the Occupational Safety and Health Act, the Department of Transportation, and information about the National Response Center. We reference internet-based government resources and offer direct links to applicable websites in an attempt to offer rapid and current sources of practical information. The format of the article is a series of hypothetical scenarios followed by commentary. Discussions of the Safe Drinking Water Act and the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act are beyond the scope of this paper. For those desiring a more in depth discussion of the relevant federal environmental laws and statutes, and applicable case law, the reader is directed to resources such as the Environmental Law Handbook, the websites of individual laws found at www.epa.gov and the decisions of individual courts of appeal. It is our hope that this article provides not only useful practical information for the practicing toxicologist, but also serves as a key reference for Medical Toxicology core content on environmental laws and regulations.

Toxicologists are often called upon to assist in environmental, industrial, occupational and public health assessments. Accordingly, medical toxicologists may find it prudent to be aware of applicable federal toxicological regulations and reporting requirements and of the roles of relevant federal agencies. These regulations are numerous, complex, and have evolved and expanded over time, making it difficult for toxicologists to sustain a current knowledge base. This article reviews the pertinent federal toxicological reporting requirements with regard to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the Atomic Energy Act (AEA), the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act (EPCRA), the Occupational Safety and Health Act, the Department of Transportation, and information about the National Response Center. We reference internet-based government resources and offer direct links to applicable websites in an attempt to offer rapid and current sources of practical information. The format of the article is a series of hypothetical scenarios followed by commentary. Discussions of the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act are beyond the scope of this paper. For those desiring a more in-depth discussion of the relevant federal environmental laws and statutes and applicable case law, the reader is directed to resources such as the Environmental Law Handbook, the websites of individual laws found at www.epa.gov and the decisions of individual courts of appeal. It is our hope that this article provides not only useful practical information for the practicing toxicologist but also serves as a key reference for medical toxicology core content on environmental laws and regulations.

Concern for children exposed to elemental mercury prompted the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to review the sources of elemental mercury exposures in children, describe the location and proportion of children affected, and make recommendations on how to prevent these exposures. In this review, we excluded mercury exposures from coal-burning facilities, dental amalgams, fish consumption, medical waste incinerators, or thimerosal-containing vaccines. We reviewed federal, state, and regional programs with data on mercury releases along with published reports of children exposed to elemental mercury in the United States. We selected all mercury-related events that were documented to expose (or potentially expose) children. Primary exposure locations were at home, at school, and at others such as industrial property not adequately remediated or medical facilities. Exposure to small spills from broken thermometers was the most common scenario; however, reports of such exposures are declining. The information reviewed suggests that most releases do not lead to demonstrable harm if the exposure period is short and the mercury is properly cleaned up. Primary prevention should include health education and policy initiatives.