Content and Dietary Exposure Assessment of Toxic Elements in Infant Formulas from the Chinese Market

Abstract

In this study, the content of chromium (Cr), arsenic (As), cadmium (Cd) and lead (Pb) in domestic and imported infant formulas from Beijing, China were analyzed using inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. The content of Cr, As, Cd and Pb was 2.51–83.80, 0.89–7.87, 0.13–3.58 and 0.36–5.57 μg/kg, respectively. Even though there were no significant differences in toxic elements content between domestic and imported infant formulas, Cd content was slightly lower in domestic samples. The estimated daily intake (EDI), target hazard quotient (THQ) and hazard index (HI) were calculated for infants between 0.5 and 5 y of age. The EDIs were lower than the oral reference doses. THQ of As, Cr, Cd and Pb was 0.027–0.103, 0.024–0.093, 0.0025–0.0090 and 0.0015–0.0046, respectively. HI values were 0.055–0.192 for boys and 0.056–0.209 for girls and were inversely associated with age with a threshold < 1. The non-carcinogenic risk value were in the safe range, indicating that exposure of As, Pb, Cr and Cd from infant formulas do not represent a health risk in China.

Occurrence and dietary exposure assessment of heavy metals in baby foods in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

“…Previous studies suggested that rice plants highly accumulate As compared to other grains such as wheat and barley (Rahman & Hasegawa, 2011;Williams et al, 2007). Many baby food products including cereals, puffs, and biscuits are made mainly of rice because of its nutrients Current levels of Cd tested in baby foods were consistent with previous reports (Table 5) in Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Germany, Poland, and China (Başaran, 2022;Bundesinstitut für Risikobewertung, 2018;Khalifa & Ahmad, 2010;Mania et al, 2015;Su et al, 2020). Cd contents in infant formula analyzed in this study were lower than the contents observed in Italy and Egypt (Bargellini et al, 2018;Ghuniem et al, 2020).…”

“…Similar results for all infant age groups were observed in the United States (0.00 μg/kg bw/day), Poland (0.05-0.76 μg/kg bw/day), Turkey (0.03 μg/kg bw/day), China (0.01 μg/kg bw/day), and Italy (0.02 μg/kg bw/day) (Bargellini et al, 2018;Başaran, 2022;Gardener et al, 2019;Mania et al, 2015;Su et al, 2020). Similar to As, the presence of Cd, even in scarce amounts, in infant food products is concerning.…”

“…Similarly, our results of As in a number of baby food samples tested were lower than recent reports of Turkey, Poland, Nigeria, Spain, and Australia (Table 5) (Başaran, 2022;Gu et al, 2020;Su et al, 2020). However, As contents in infant formula stage 1 and cereal-based meals in this study were higher than observed in similar studies of China and Poland (Mania et al, 2015;Su et al, 2020). For the last decade, rice has been a debatable topic of concern, particularly on infants and small children (U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 2016).…”

Determination of 40 Elements in Powdered Infant Formulas and Related Risk Assessment

“…For example, a study in the field conducted in 2018 [ 30 ] on some infant formulas sold in Ethiopia reported a range concentration of Zn and Pb equal to 27.9–71.5 µg g −1 and <LOD–0.103 µg g −1 , respectively, while Cd concentrations were always <LOD. These differences in elemental concentrations all over the countries were also evidenced by other researches in China and Pakistan [ 46 , 47 ]. Likewise, similarities between the elemental concentrations found in formulas marketed in EU countries and differences with the levels reported for the formulas sold in countries outside EU are due to differences in raw materials, processing and packaging, and regulations.…”

Analysis and health risk assessments of heavy metals and nitrate migration into pickle beverages

“… Here, RfD is the oral toxicity reference dose of heavy metals/nitrate (mg/kg/day). RfD values for Al, iAs, Cd, Pb, and nitrate are 1.0, 3.0 × 10 −4 , 1.0 × 10 −3 , 4.0 × 10 −4 , and 7.0 mg/kg/day, respectively (ATSDR, 2013; Su et al, 2020; US EPA, 2015). When HQ ≤1, the pickle beverages could be safe for the consumed population, while at HQ > 1, there is a potential noncarcinogenic health risk (Fathabad et al, 2018; US EPA, 2000).…”