The paper builds on existing literature, highlighting current understanding and identifying unresolved issues about MeHg exposure, health effects, and risk assessment, and concludes with a consensus statement. Methylmercury is a potent toxin, bioaccumulated and concentrated through the aquatic food chain, placing at risk people, throughout the globe and across the socioeconomic spectrum, who consume predatory fish or for whom fish is a dietary mainstay. Methylmercury developmental neurotoxicity has constituted the basis for risk assessments and public health policies. Despite gaps in our knowledge on new bioindicators of exposure, factors that influence MeHg uptake and toxicity, toxicokinetics, neurologic and cardiovascular effects in adult populations, and the nutritional benefits and risks from the large number of marine and freshwater fish and fish-eating species, the panel concluded that to preserve human health, all efforts need to be made to reduce and eliminate sources of exposure.

BackgroundThe U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) has estimated the neurological benefits of reductions in prenatal methylmercury (MeHg) exposure in past assessments of rules controlling mercury (Hg) emissions. A growing body of evidence suggests that MeHg exposure can also lead to increased risks of adverse cardiovascular impacts in exposed populations.Data extractionThe U.S. EPA assembled the authors of this article to participate in a workshop, where we reviewed the current science concerning cardiovascular health effects of MeHg exposure via fish and seafood consumption and provided recommendations concerning whether cardiovascular health effects should be included in future Hg regulatory impact analyses.Data synthesisWe found the body of evidence exploring the link between MeHg and acute myocardial infarction (MI) to be sufficiently strong to support its inclusion in future benefits analyses, based both on direct epidemiological evidence of an MeHg–MI link and on MeHg’s association with intermediary impacts that contribute to MI risk. Although additional research in this area would be beneficial to further clarify key characteristics of this relationship and the biological mechanisms that underlie it, we consider the current epidemiological literature sufficiently robust to support the development of a dose–response function.ConclusionsWe recommend the development of a dose–response function relating MeHg exposures with MIs for use in regulatory benefits analyses of future rules targeting Hg air emissions.

In the current U.S. Environmental Protection Agency reference dose (RfD) for methylmercury, the one-compartment pharmacokinetic model is used to convert fetal cord blood mercury (Hg) concentration to a maternal intake dose. This requires a ratio relating cord blood Hg concentration to maternal blood Hg concentration. No formal analysis of either the central tendency or variability of this ratio has been done. This variability contributes to the overall variability in the dose estimate. A ratio of 1.0 is implicitly used in the model, but an uncertainty factor adjustment is applied to the central tendency estimate of dose to address variability in that estimate. Thus, incorporation of the cord:maternal ratio and its variability into the estimate of intake dose could result in a significant change in the value of the RfD. We analyzed studies providing data on the cord:maternal blood Hg ratio and conducted a Monte Carlo-based meta-analysis of 10 studies meeting all inclusion criteria to generate a comprehensive estimate of the central tendency and variability of the ratio. This analysis results in a recommended central tendency estimate of 1.7, a coefficient of variation of 0.56, and a 95th percentile of 3.4. By analogy to the impact of the similar hair:blood Hg ratio on the overall variability in the dose estimate, incorporation of the cord:maternal ratio may support a 3-fold uncertainty factor adjustment to the central tendency estimate of dose to account for pharmacokinetic variability. Whether the information generated in this analysis is sufficient to warrant a revision to the RfD will depend on the outcome of a comprehensive reanalysis of the entire one-compartment model. We are currently engaged in such an analysis.

No abstract