Environmental risk-management decisions in the U.S. involving potential exposures to methylmercury currently use a reference dose (RfD) developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). This RfD is based on retrospective studies of an acute poisoning incident in Iraq in which grain contaminated with a methylmercury fungicide was inadvertently used in the baking of bread.1 The exposures, which were relatively high but lasted only a few months, were associated with neurological effects in both adults (primarily paresthesia) and infants (late walking, late talking, etc.). It is generally believed that the developing fetus represents a particularly sensitive subpopulation for the neurological effects of methylmercury. The USEPA derived an RfD of 0.1 g/kg/day based on benchmark dose (BMD) modeling of the combined neurological endpoints reported for children exposed in utero. This RfD included an uncertainty factor of 10 to consider human pharmacokinetic variability and database limitations (lack of data on multigeneration effects or possible long-term sequelae of perinatal exposure). Alcoa signed an Administrative Order of Consent for the conduct of a remedial investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS) at their Point Comfort Operations and the adjacent Lavaca Bay in Texas to address the effects of historical discharges of mercury-containing wastewater. In cooperation with the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission and USEPA Region VI, Alcoa conducted a baseline risk assessment to assess potential risk to human health and the environment. As a part of this assessment, Alcoa pursued the development of a site-specific RfD for methylmercury to specifically address the potential human health effects associated with the ingestion of contaminated finfish and shellfish from Lavaca Bay. Application of the published USEPA RfD to this site is problematic; while the study underlying the RfD represented acute exposure to relatively high concentrations of methylmercury, the exposures of concern for the Point Comfort site are from the chronic consumption of relatively low concentrations of methylmercury in fish. Since the publication of the USEPA RfD, several analyses of chronic exposure to methylmercury in fish-eating populations have been reported. The purpose of the analysis reported here was to evaluate the possibility of deriving an RfD for methylmercury, specifically for the case of fish ingestion, on the basis of these new studies. In order to better support the risk-management decisions associated with developing a remediation approach for the site in question, the analysis was designed to provide information on the distribution of acceptable ingestion rates across a population, which could reasonably be expected to be consistent with the results of the epidemiological studies of other fish-eating populations. Based on a review of the available literature on the effects of methylmercury, a study conducted with a population in the Seychelles Islands was selected as the critical study for this analysis. The exposures to methylmercury in this population result from chronic, multigenerational ingestion of contaminated fish. This prospective study was carefully conducted and analyzed, included a large cohort of mother-infant pairs, and was relatively free of confounding factors. The results of this study are essentially negative, and a no-observed-adverse-effect level (NOAEL) derived from the estimated exposures has recently been used by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) as the basis for a chronic oral minimal risk level (MRL) for methylmercury. In spite of the fact that no statistically significant effects were observed in this study, the data as reported are suitable for dose-response analysis using the BMD method. Evaluation of the BMD method used in this analysis, as well as in the current USEPA RfD, has demonstrated that the resulting 95% lower bound on the 10% benchmark dose (BMDL) represents a conservative estimate of the traditional NOAEL, and that it is superior to the use of “average” or “grouped” exposure estimates when dose-response information is available, as is the case for the Seychelles study. A more recent study in the Faroe Islands, which did report statistically significant associations between methylmercury exposure and neurological effects, could not be used for dose-response modeling due to inadequate reporting of the data and confounding from co-exposure to polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). BMD modeling over the wide range of neurological endpoints reported in the Seychelles study yielded a lowest BMDL for methylmercury in maternal hair of 21 ppm. This BMDL was then converted to an expected distribution of daily ingestion rates across a population using Monte Carlo analysis with a physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model to evaluate the impact of interindividual variability. The resulting distribution of ingestion rates at the BMDL had a geometric mean of 1.60 g/kg/day with a geometric standard deviation of 1.33; the 1st, 5th, and 10th percentiles of the distribution were 0.86, 1.04, and 1.15 g/kg/day. In place of the use of an uncertainty factor of 3 for pharmacokinetic variability, as is done in the current RfD, one of these lower percentiles of the daily ingestion rate distribution provides a scientifically based, conservative basis for taking into consideration the impact of pharmacokinetic variability across the population. On the other hand, it was felt that an uncertainty factor of 3 for database limitations should be used in the current analysis. Although there can be high confidence in the benchmark-estimated NOAEL of 21 ppm in the Seychelles study, some results in the New Zealand and Faroe Islands studies could be construed to suggest the possibility of effects at maternal hair concentrations below 10 ppm. In addition, while concerns regarding the possibility of chronic sequelae are not supported by the available data, neither can they be absolutely ruled out. The use of an uncertainty factor of 3 is equivalent to using a NOAEL of 7 ppm in maternal hair, which provides additional protection against the possibility that effects could occur at lower concentrations in some populations. Based on the analysis described above, the distribution of acceptable daily ingestion rates (RfDs) recommended to serve as the basis for site-specific risk-management decisions at Alcoa’s Point Comfort Operations ranges from approximately 0.3 to 1.1 g/kg/day, with a population median (50th percentile) of 0.5 g/kg/day. By analogy with USEPA guidelines for the use of percentiles in applications of distributions in exposure assessments, the 10th percentile provides a reasonably conservative measure. On this basis, a site-specific RfD of 0.4 g/kg/day is recommended.
Abbott N., and Goodings A.J. Text Inst 1949: 40T: 232 (As cited in Robbins, 1994).
2.
Abe T., Haga T., and Kurokawa M.Blockage of axoplasmic transport and depolymerisation of reassembled microtubles by methyl mercury. Brain Res1975: 86: 504-508.
3.
Aberg B., Ekman L., Falk R., et al.Metabolism of methyl mercury (203Hg) compounds in man. Arch Environ Health1969: 478-484.
4.
Agency for Toxic Substances Disease Registry (ATSDR). Toxicological Profile for Mercury Compounds, Update. ATSDR, Atlanta, GA. August, 1997.
5.
Al-Shahristani H., and Shihab K.Variation of biological half-life or methylmercury in man. Arch Environ Health1974: 28: 342-344.
6.
Ali S. F., Lebel C. P., and Bondy S. C.Reactive oxygen species formation as a biomarker of methylmercury and trimethyltin toxicity. Neurotoxicology1992: 13: 637-648 (As cited in ATSDR, 1997).
7.
Allen B., Covington T., and Clewell H.Investigation of the impact of pharmacokinetic variability and uncertainty on risks predicted with a pharmacokinetic model for chloroform. Toxicology1996: 111: 289-303.
8.
Allen B., Kavlock R., Kimmel C., and Faustman E.Dose-response assessment for developmental toxicity. II. Comparison of generic benchmark dose estimates with no observed adverse effect levels. Fundam Appl Toxicol1994a: 23: 487-495.
9.
Allen B., Kavlock R., Kimmel C., and Faustman E.Dose-response assessment for developmental toxicity. III. Statistical models. Fundam Appl Toxicol1994b: 23: 496-509.
10.
Altman P. L., and Dittmer D. S.Blood and Other Body Fluids Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, Washington, DC, 1961.
11.
Amin-Zaki L., Elhassani S., Majeed M. A., Clarkson T. W., Doherty R. A., and Greenwood M.Intra-uterine methylmercury poisoning in Iraq. Pediatrics1974: 54: 587-595.
12.
Amin-Zaki L., Elhassani, S., Majeed M., Clarkson T., Doherty R., and Greenwood M.Perinatal methylmercury poisoning in Iraq. Am J Dis Child1976: 130: 1070-1076.
13.
Amin-Zaki L., Majeed M., Elhassani S., Clarkson T., Greenwood M., Doherty R.Prenatal methylmercury poisoning. Am J Dis Child1979: 133: 172-177.
14.
Amin-Zaki L., Majeed M., Greendow M., et al.Methylmercury poisoning in the Iraqi suckling infant: A longitudinal study over five years. J Appl Toxicol1981: 1: 210-214.
15.
Bakir F., Damluji S., Amin-Zaki L., et al.Methylmercury poisoning in Iraq. Science1973: 181: 230-241.
16.
Barman J. M., Astore I., and Pecoraro V.The normal trichogram of the adult. J Invest Dermatol1965: 44: 233-236.
17.
Barnes D. G., Daston G. P., Evans J. S., Jarabek A. M., Kavlock R. J., Kimmel C. A., Park C., and Spitzer H. L.Benchmark dose workshop: Criteria for use of a benchmark dose to estimate a reference dose. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol1995: 21: 296-306.
18.
Beattie M., Gerstenberger S., Hoffman R., and Dellinger J.Rodent neurotoxicity bioassays for screening contaminated Great Lakes fish. Environ Toxicol Chem1996: 15: 313-318.
19.
Berglund F., Berlin M., Birke G., et al.Methyl mercury in fish: A toxicologic-epidemiologic evaluation of risks. Report from an expert group. Nord Hyg Tidskr (Stockholm)1971: 4 (suppl): 19-364 (As cited in USEPA, 1996).
20.
Berlin M., Carlson J., and Norseth T.Dose-dependence of methylmercury metabolism. Arch Environ Health1975: 30: 307-313.
21.
Best C. H.The Physiological Basis of Medical PracticeWilliams and Wilkins, Baltimore, 1961, pp. 19-19, 29-29.
22.
Birke G., Johnels G., Plantin L.-O., Sjostrand B., Skerfving S., and Westermark T.Studies on humans exposed to methyl mercury through fish consumption. Arch Environ Health1972: 25: 77-77.
23.
Bornhausen M., Musch H., and Greim H.Operant behavior performance changes in rats after prenatal methylmercury exposure. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol1980: 56: 305-310.
24.
Brown R. P., Delp M. D., Lindstedt S. L., Rhomberg L. R., and Beliles R. P.1997. Physiological parameter values for physiologically based pharmacokinetic models. Toxicol Ind Health1997: 13: 407-484.
25.
Brozoski T., Brown R., Rosvold H., and Goldman P.Cognitive deficit caused by regional depletion of dopamine in prefrontal cortex of rhesus monkeys. Science1979: 31: 929-931 (As cited in Gilbert et al., 1993).
Burbacher T., Grant K., and Mottet N.Retarded object permanence development in methylmercury exposed Macaca fascicularis infants. Dev Psychol1986: 22: 771-776.
28.
Burbacher T., Monnet C., Grant K., and Mottet N.Methyl mercury exposure and reproductive-dysfunciton in the nonhuman primate. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol1984: 75: 18-24.
29.
Burbacher T., Mohamed M., and Mottett N.Methylmercury effects on reproduction and offspring size at birth. Reprod Toxicol1988: 1: 267-278.
30.
Burbacher T., Rodier P., and Weiss B.Methylmercury developmental neurotoxicity: A comparison of effects in humans and animals. Neurotoxicol Teratol1990a: 12: 191-202.
31.
Burbacher T., Sackett G., and Mottet N.Methylmercury effects on the social behavior of Macaca fasicicularis infants. Neurotoxicol Teratol1990b: 12: 65-71.
32.
Cernichiari E., Brewer R., Myers G. J., Marsh D. O., Lapham L. W., Cox C., Shamlaye C. F., Berlin M., Davidson P. W., and Clarkson T. W.Monitoring methylmercury during pregnancy: maternal hair predicts fetal brain exposure. NeuroToxicology1995a: 16: 705-710.
33.
Cernichiari E., Toribara T. Y., Liang L., Marsh D. O., Berlin M. W., Myers G. J., Cox C., Shamlaye C. F., Choisy O., Davidson P., and Clarkson T. W.The biological monitoring of mercury in the Seychelles study. NeuroToxicology1995b: 16: 613-628.
34.
Chang L. W., Yamaguchi S., and Dudley A.Neurological changes in cats following long-term diet of mercury contaminated tuna. Acta Neuropath1974: 27: 171-176.
35.
Chang L., Gilbert M., and Sprechler J.Modification of methylmercury neurotoxicity by vitamin E. Environ Res1978: 17: 356-366 (As cited in WHO, 1990).
36.
Chang L., Dudley A., Dudley M., Ganther H., and Sunde M.Modification of the neurotoxic effects of methyl mercury by selenium. In: Roizin L., Shiraki H., and Grcevic N., (Eds.), Neurotoxicology. Raven Press, New York, 1977, pp. 275-282.
37.
Charbonneau S., Munro I., and Nera E.Chronic toxicity of methyl mercury in the adult cat. Toxicology1976: 5: 337-340.
38.
Charleston J. S., Bolender R. P., Body R. L., Burbacher T. M., Vahter M. E., and Mottet N. K.Methylmercury induced cell population changes at specific brain sites of the monkey Macaca fascicularis. Toxicologist1994: 14: 259-259.
39.
Chen W., Body R., and Mottet N.Biochemical and morphological studies of monkeys chronically exposed to methylmercury. J Toxicol Environ Health1983: 12: 407-416.
40.
Choi B.The effects of methylmercury on the developing brain. Prog Neurobiol1989: 32: 447-470.
41.
Choi B., Lapham L., Amin-Zaki L., et al.Abnormal neuronal migration, deranged cerebral cortical organization, and diffuse white matter astrocytosis of human fetal brain: A major effect of methylmercury poisoning in utero. J NeuroPathol Exp Neurol1978: 37: 719-733.
42.
Cicmanec J. L.Comparison of four human studies on perinatal exposure to methylmercury for use in risk assessment. Toxicology1996: 111: 157-162.
43.
Clarkson T. W.Mercury. J Am Coll Toxicol1989: 8: 1291-1295.
44.
Clarkson T. W.Environmental contaminants in the food chain. Am J Clin Nutr1995: 61 (suppl): 682S-686S.
45.
Clarkson T. W.Mercury: major issues in environmental health. Environ Health Perspect1992: 100: 31-38.
46.
Clarkson T. W.Methylmercury: loaves versus fishes. 1997 CIIT Founders’ Award Presentation. CIIT Act1997: 17: 2-7.
47.
Clarkson T. W., Cox C., Davidson P., and Myers G.Mercury in fish. Science1998: 279: 459-459, 461-461.
48.
Clarkson T. W., Amin-Zaki L., and Al-Tikriti S.An outbreak of methyl mercury poisoning due to consumption of contaminated grain. Fed Proc1976: 35: 2395-2399.
49.
Clarys J. P., Martin A. D., and Drinkwater D. T.Gross tissue weights in the human body by cadaver dissection. Human Biol1984: 56: 459-473.
50.
Clay M. M.A Diagnostic Survey: The Early Detection of Reading DifficultiesHeineman Education Books, Auckland, 1972. 100-100 pp. (As cited in Kjellstrom et al., 1989).
51.
Clay M. M.The Early Detection of Reading Difficulties2nd ed.Heineman Education Books, Auckland, 1979. 110-110 pp. (As cited in Kjellstrom et al., 1989).
52.
Clewell H. J. III. The application of physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling in human health risk assessment of hazardous substances. Toxicol Lett1995: 79: 207-217.
53.
Clewell H. J. III, and Andersen M. E.Use of physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling to investigate individual versus population risk. Toxicology1996: 111: 315-329.
54.
Clewell H. J. III, Gentry P. R., and Gearhart J. M.Investigation of the potential impact of benchmark dose and pharmacokinetic modeling in noncancer risk assessment. J Toxicol Environ Health1997: 52: 475-515.
55.
Clewell H. J. III, Lee T., and Carpenter R. L.Sensitivity of physiologically based pharmacokinetic models to variation in model parameters: methylene chloride. Risk Anal1994: 14: 521-531.
56.
Colomina M., Albina M., Domingo J., and Corbella J.Influence of maternal stress on the effects of prenatal exposure to methylmercury and arsenic on postnatal development and behavior in mice: a preliminary evaluation. Physiol Behav1997: 61: 455-459.
57.
Connolly A. J., Nachtman W., and Pritchett E. M.Key maths, diagnostic arithmetic test. American Guidance Service, Circle Pines, Minnesota, 1971, 20-20 pp. (As cited in Kjellstrom et al., 1989).
58.
Cox C., Clarkson T., Marsh D., et al.Dose-response analysis of infants prenatally exposed to methyl mercury: An application of a single compartment model to single-strand hair analysis. Environ Res1989: 49: 318-332.
59.
Cox C., Marsh D., Myers G., Clarkson T.Analysis of data on delayed development from the 1971-1972 outbreak of methylmercury poisoning in Iraq: assessment of influential points. NeuroToxicology1995: 16: 727-730.
60.
Crump K.A new method for determining allowable daily intakes. Fundam Appl Toxicol1984: 4: 854-871.
61.
Crump K.Calculation of benchmark doses from continuous data. Risk Anal1995: 15: 79-89.
62.
Crump K., Viren J., Silvers A., Clewell H., Gearhart J., and Shipp A.Reanalysis of dose-response data from the Iraqi methylmercury poisoning episode. Risk Anal1995: 15: 523-532.
63.
Cuomo V., Ambrosi Z., Annau Z., Cagiano R., Brunello N., and Racagni G.Behavioral and neurochemical changes in offspring of rats exposed to methyl mercury during gestation. Neurobehav Toxicol Teratol1984: 6: 249-254.
64.
Davidson P., Myers G., Cox C., Shamlaye C., Marsh D., Tanner M., Berlin M., Sloane-Reeves J., Cernichiari E., Choisy O., Choi A., and Clarkson T.Longitudinal neurodevelopmental study of Seychellois children following in utero exposure to methylmercury from maternal fish ingestion: outcomes at 19 and 29 months. NeuroToxicology1995: 16: 677-688.
65.
Dellinger J., Malek L., and Beattie M.Mercury contamination of fish in the Ojibwa diet. II. Sensory evoked responses in rats fed walleye. Water Air Soil Pollut1995: 80: 77-83.
66.
Den Tonkelaar, et al. 1974 (As cited in USEPA, 1997; vol. V, p. 6-24, no reference provided).
67.
Dick G. L., Hughes J. T., Mitchell J. W., and Davidson F.Survey of trace elements and pesticide residues in the New Zealand diet. I. Trace element content. NZJ Science1978: 21: 57-69 (As cited in Kjellstrom et al., 1986).
68.
Diem K., and Lentner C. (Eds.). Documenta Geigy: Scientific Tables, 7th Edition. Geigy Pharmaceuticals, Ardsley, New York, 1971.
69.
Diem K., and Lentner C. (Eds.). Geigy Scientific Tables Published by Geigy Pharmaceuticals, Division of Ciba-Geigy Corporation, Ardsley, New York, 1970, p. 657-657.
70.
Dourson M. L.Methods for establishing oral reference doses. In: Abernathy C. O., et al. (Eds.), Risk Assessment of Essential Elements, ILSI Press, Washington, DC, 1994.
71.
Dourson M. L., and Stara J. F.Regulatory history and experimental support of uncertainty (safety) factors. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol1983: 3: 224-238.
72.
Dourson M. L., Knauf L. A., and Swartout J. C.On the reference dose (RfD) and its underlying toxicity data base. Toxicol Ind Health1992: 9: 171-189.
73.
Dunn M. L., and Dunn M. L.Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test Revised version. American Guidance Service, Circle Press, Minnesota, 1981. 15-15 pp. (As cited in Kjellstrom et al., 1989).
74.
Dyer R., Eccias C., and Annau Z.Evoked potential alterations following prenatal methyl mercury exposure. Pharmacol Biochem Behav1978: 8: 137-141.
75.
Egeland G., and Middaugh J.Balancing fish consumption benefits with mercury exposure. Science1997: 278: 1904-1905.
76.
Elsner J.Tactile-kinesthetic system of rats as an animal model for minimal brain dysfunction. Arch Toxicol1991: 65: 465-473.
77.
Evans H. L., Garman R. H., and Weiss B.Methylmercury: Exposure duration and regional distribution as determinants of neurotoxicity in nonhuman primates. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol1977: 41: 15-33.
78.
Everts J. F.Everts Revised Behaviour Rating Scale of Social and Personal Adjustment. Guidelines for Use Department of Education, University of Auckland, Auckland, 1983. 28-28 pp. (As cited in Kjellstrom et al., 1989).
79.
Farris F., Dedrick R., Allen P., and Smith J.Physiological model for the pharmacokinetics of methyl mercury in the growing rat. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol1993: 119: 74-90.
80.
Faustman E., Allen B., Kavlock R., and Kimmel C.Dose-response assessment for developmental toxicity. I. Characterization of database and determination of no observed adverse effects levels. Fundam Appl Toxicol1994: 23: 478-486.
81.
Flesch P.Hair Growth. In: Rothman S. (Ed.), Physiology and Biochemistry of the SkinUniversity of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, 1954, pp. 601-660.
82.
Fowler B., and Woods J.The transplacental toxicity of methyl mercury to fetal rat liver mitochondria. Lab Invest1977: 36: 122-130.
83.
Fredriksson A., Dencker L., Archer T., and Danielsson B.Prenatal coexposure to metallic mercury vapour and methylmercury produce interactive behavioural changes in adult rats. Neurotoxicol Teratol1996: 18: 129-134.
84.
Friedel J., Will F., and Grosshans E.Phototrichogram. Adaptation, standardization, and applications. (French). Ann Dermatol Venereol1989: 116: 629-636 (As cited in Cernichiari et al., 1995b).
85.
Fuyuta M., Fujimoto T., and Hirata S.Embrotoxic effects of methylmercuric chloride administrated to mice and rats during organogenesis. Teratology1978: 18: 353-366.
86.
Fuyuta M., Fujimoto T., and Hirata S.Teratogenic effects of a single oral administration of methylmercuric chloride in mice. Acta Anat1979: 104: 346-362.
87.
Ganther H. E.Modification of methylmercury toxicity and metabolism by selenium and vitamin E: possible mechanisms. Environ Health Perspect1978: 25: 71-76.
88.
Gaylor D.Quantitative risk analysis for quantal reproductive and developmental effects. Environ Health Perspect1989: 79: 243-246.
89.
Gearhart J., Clewell H., Crump K., Shipp A., and Silvers A.Pharmacokinetic dose estimates of mercury in children and dose-response curves of performance tests in a large epidemiological study. In: Porcella D. B., Huckabee J. W., and Wheatley B. (Eds.), Mercury as a Global Pollutant, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 1995, pp. 49-58.
90.
Geelan J. A. G., Dormans J. A., and Verhoef A.The early effects of methylmercury on the developing rat brain. Acta Neuropathol1990: 80: 432-438.
91.
Gentry P. R., Gearhart J. M., Covington T. R., Jacobson K., Yager J. W., and Clewell H. J.Comparison of alternative exposure measures for evaluating the neurological effects of methylmercury in children. Risk Anal2001: (submitted).
92.
Geyer M., Butcher R., and Fite K.A study of startle and locomotor activity in rats exposed prenatally to methyl mercury. Neurobehav Toxicol Teratol1985: 7: 759-765.
93.
Gilbert S., Burbacher T., and Rice D.Effects of in utero methylmercury exposure on a spatial delayed alternation task in monkeys. Toxicol Applied Pharmacol1993: 123: 130-136.
94.
Grandjean P., Jorgensen P. J., and Weihe P.Human milk as a source of methylmercury exposure in infants. Environ Health Perspect1994: 102: 74-77.
95.
Grandjean P., Weihe P., and White R.Milestone development in infants exposed to methylmercury from human milk. NeuroToxicology1995: 16: 27-34.
96.
Grandjean P., Weihe P., Jorgensen P. J., Clarkson T., Cernichiari E., and Videro T.Impact of maternal seafood diet on fetal exposure to mercury, selenium, and lead. Arch Environ Health1992: 47: 185-195.
97.
Grandjean P., Weihe P., White R., Debes F., Araki S., Yokoyama K., Murata K., Sorensen N., Dahl R., and Jorgensen P.Cognitive deficit in 7-year-old children with prenatal exposure to methylmercury. Neurotoxicol Teratol1997: 20: 1-12.
98.
Gunderson V., Grant K., Burbacher T., Fagan J., and Mottet N.The effect of low-level prenatal methylmercury exposure on visual recognition in infant crab-eating macaques. Child Dev1986: 57: 1076-1083.
99.
Gunderson V., Grant-Webster K., Burbacher T. M., and Mottet N.Visual recognition memory deficits in methylmercury-exposed Macaca fasicularis infants. Neurotoxicol Teratol1988: 10: 373-379.
100.
Hansen N. J., Lohman T. G., Going S. B., Hall M. C., Pamenter R. W., Bare L. A., Boyden T. W., and Houtkooper L. B.Prediction of body compoxition in premenopousal females from dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. J Appl Physiol1993: 75: 1637-1641.
101.
Harada M.Minamata disease: methylmercury poisoning in Japan caused by environmental pollution. Crit Rev Toxicol1995: 25: 1-24.
102.
Harada M.Minamata disease: Organic mercury poisoning caused by ingestion of contaminated fish. In: Jellife E. F., and Jellife D. B. (Eds.), Adverse Effects of Food, Plenum Press, New York, 1982, pp. 135-148.
Hattis D., and Silver K.Human interindividual variability—a major source of uncertainty in assessing risks for noncancer health effects. Risk Anal1994: 14: 421-431.
105.
Hattis D., Erdreich L., and Ballew M.Human variability in susceptibility to toxic chemicals—a preliminary analysis of phamcokinetic data from normal volunteers. Risk Anal1987: 7: 415-426.
106.
Haxton J., Lindsay D. G., Hislop J. S., Salmon L., Dixon E. J., Evans W. H., Reid J. R., Hewitt C. J., and Jeffries D. F.Duplicate diet study on fishing communities in the United Kingdom: mercury exposure in a “critical group.” Environ Res1979: 18: 351-368.
107.
Hayashi S., Mizamoto I., and Takeda K.Measurement of human hair growth by optical microscopy and image analysis. Br J Dermatol1991: 125: 123-129.
108.
Hislop J., Collier T., White G., et al., The use of keratinized tissues to monitor the detailed exposure of man to methyl mercury from fish. Chemical Toxicology and Clinical Chemistry of Metals. Published by IUPAC, 1983, pp. 145-148.
109.
Hughes J., and Annau Z.Postnatal behavioral effects in mice after prenatal exposure to methylmercury. Pharm Biochem Behav1976: 4: 385-391.
110.
Hunter D., and Russell D.Focal cerebral and cerebellar atrophy in a human subject due to organic mercury compounds. JNeurol Neurosurg Psychiat1954: 17: 235-241.
111.
Hytten F. E., and Leitch I.The Physiology of Human Pregnancy, 2nd ed.Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, 1971.
112.
Imura N., and Naganuma A.Possible mechanisms of detoxifying effect of selenium on the toxicity of mercury compounds. In: Susuki T., et al. (Eds.), Advances in Mercury ToxicologyPlenum Press, New York, 1991, pp. 275-288.
113.
Inouye M., and Kajiwara Y.Developmental disturbances of the fetal brain in guinea-pigs caused by methylmercury. Arch Toxicol1988a: 62: 15-21.
114.
Inouye M., and Kajiwara Y.An attempt to assess the inheritable effect of methylmercury toxicity subsequent to prenatal exposure of mice. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol1988b: 41: 508-514.
115.
Inouye M., Murao K., and Kajiwara Y.Behavioral and neuropathological effects of prenatal methyl mercury exposure in mice. Neurobehav Toxicol Teratol1985: 7: 227-232.
116.
International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). Report of the task group on reference man ICRP Publication 23, 1975.
117.
ICRP. Report of the task group on reference man. A report prepared by a task group of committee 2 of the ICRP, Pergamon Press, New York, 1992.
118.
IRIS. Mercury Intergrated Risk Information Service, Cincinnati, OH, 1994.
119.
Iwata K., Nanba K., Kojima M., and Abe H. In: Tsubake T. (Ed.), Studies on the Health Effects of Alkylmercury in JapanEnvironment Agency, Japan, 1975, pp. 202-217.
120.
Jacobson J. L., Jacobson S. W., and Humphrey H. E. B.Effects of in utero exposure to polychlorinated biphenyls and related contaminants on cognitive functioning in young children. J Pediatr1990: 116: 38-45.
121.
Kawasaki Y., Ikeda Y., Yamamoto T., and Ikeda K.Long-term toxicity study of methylmercury chloride in monkeys. J Food Hyg Asoc Jpn1986: 27: 528-552.
122.
Kershaw T., Dhahir P., and Clarkson T.The relationship between blood levels and dose of methylmercury in man. Arch Environ Health1980: 35: 28-36.
123.
Khera S.Reproductive capability of male rats and mice treated with methyl mercury. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol1973: 24: 167-177.
124.
Khera K., and Tabacova S.Effects of methylmercuric chloride on the progeny of mice and rats treated before or during gestation. Fd Cosmet Toxicol1973: 11: 245-254.
125.
Kitamura S., Sumino K., Hayakawa K., and Shibata T.Mercury content in human tissues from Japan. In: Nordberg G. F. (Ed.), Effects and Dose-Response Relationships of Toxic MetalsElsevier Scientific Publishing Company, Amsterdam, 1976.
126.
Kjellstrom T., Kennedy P., Wallis S., and Mantell C. Physical and mental development of children with prenatal exposure to mercury from fish. Stage 1: Preliminary tests at age 4. National Swedish Environmental Protection Board, Report 3080. Solna, Sweden, 1986.
127.
Kjellstrom T., Kennedy P., Wallis S., Stewart A., Friberg L., Lind B., Wutherspoon T., and Mantell C. Physical and Mental Development of Children with Prenatal Exposure to Mercury from Fish. Stage 2: Interviews and Psychological Tests at Age 6. Report 3342. National Swedish Environmental Board, Solna, Sweden, 1989, 112 pp.
128.
Kyle J., and Ghani N.Methylmercury in human hair: A study of a Papua New Guinean population exposed to methylmercury through fish consumption. Arch Environ Health1982: 37: 266-270.
129.
Lapham L., Cernichiari E., Cox C., Myers G. J., Baggs R. B., Brewer R., Shamlaye C. F., Davidson P. W., and Clarkson T. W.An analysis of autopsy brain tissue from infants prenatally exposed to methylmercury. NeuroToxicology1995: 16: 689-704.
130.
Larsson P.Contaminated sediments of lakes and oceans act as sources of chlorinated hydrocarbons for release to water and atmosphere. Nature1985: 317: 347-349 (As cited in Weihe et al., 1996).
131.
LeBel C. P., Ali S. F., McKee M., et al.Organometal-induced increases in oxygen reactive species: The potential of 20,70-dichlorofluoroscein diacetate as an index of neurotoxic damage. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol1990: 104: 17-34 (As cited in ATSDR, 1997).
132.
LeBel C. P., Ali S. F., and Bondy S. C.Deforoxamine inhibits methyl mercury-induced increases in reactive oxygen species formation in rat brain. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol1992: 112: 161-165 (As cited in ATSDR, 1997).
133.
Lebel J., Mergler D., Mucotte M., et al.Evidence of early nervous system dysfunction in Amazonian populations exposed to low-levels of methylmercury. NeuroToxicology1996: 17: 157-168.
134.
Levin E., Schantz S., and Bowman R.Delayed spatial alternation deficits resulting from perinatal PCB exposure in monkeys. Arch Toxicol1988: 62: 267-273 (As cited in Gilbert et al., 1993).
135.
Leyshon K., and Morgan A.An integrated study of the morphological and gross-elemental consequences of methylmercury intoxication in rats, with particular attention on the cerebellum. Scanning Microsc1991: 5: 895-904.
136.
Lind B., Friberg L., and Nylander M.Preliminary studies on methylmercury biotransformation and clearance in the brain of primates: II. Demethylation of mercury in brain. J Trace Elem Exp Med1988: 1: 49-56.
137.
Magos L.Selective atomic absorption determination of inorganic mercury and methylmercury in undigested biological samples. Analyst1971: 96: 847-853 (As cited in Sherlock et al., 1984).
138.
Marsh D., Clarkson T., Cox C., Myers G., Amin-Zaki L., and Al-Tikriti S.Fetal methylmercury poisoning. Relationship between concentration in single strands of maternal hair and child effects. Arch Neurol1987: 44: 1017-1022.
139.
Marsh D., Myers G., Clarkson T., Amin-Zaki L., Al-Tikriti S., and Majeff M.Fetal methylmercury poisoning: Clinical and toxicological data on 29 cases. Ann Neurol1980: 7: 348-353.
140.
Marsh D., Clarkson T., Myers G., Davidson P., Cox C., Cernichiari E., Tanner M., Lednar W., Shamlaye C., Choisy O., Horareau C., and Berlin M.The Seychelles study of fetal methylmercury exposure and child development: Introduction. NeuroToxicology1995a: 16: 583-596.
141.
Marsh D., Turner M., Smith J., Allen P., and Richdale N.Fetal methylmercury study in a Peruvian fish-eating population. NeuroToxicology1995b: 16: 717-726.
142.
Marsh D. O., Turner M. D., Smith J., Wun Choi J., and Clarkson T. W.Methylmercury (MeHg) in human populations eating large quantities of marine fish. II. American Samoa; cannery workers and fisherman. Proceedings First International Conference on Mercury, vol II, 1974, pp. 235-239.
143.
Marsh D. O., Myers G., Clarkson T., et al.Dose-response relationship for human fetal exposure to methylmercury. Clin Toxicol1981: 18: 1311-1318.
144.
Matthews A.Mercury content of commercially important fish of the Seychelles, and hair mercury levels of a selected part of the population. Environ Res1983: 30: 305-312.
145.
McCarthy D.McCarthy Scales of Children’s AbilitiesPsychological Corporation, New York, 1972, 75-75 pp. (As cited in Kjellstrom et al., 1989).
146.
McKeown-Eyssen G., and Ruedy J.Prevalence of neurologic abnormality in Cree Indians exposed to methylmercury in Northern Quebec. Clin Invest Med1983a: 6: 161-169.
147.
McKeown-Eyssen G., and Ruedy J.Methyl mercury exposure in northern Quebec. I. Neurologic findings in adults. Am J Epidemiol1983b: 18: 461-469.
148.
McKeown-Eyssen G., Ruedy J., and Neims A.Methyl mercury exposure in northern Quebec. II. Neurologic findings in children. Am J Epidemiol1983c: 118: 470-479.
149.
Miettinen J. K., Rahola T., Hattula T., Rissanen K., and Tillander M.Elimination of 203Hg-methylmercury in man. Ann Clin Res1972: 3: 110-122.
150.
Mitsumori K., Hirano M., Ueda H., et al.Chronic toxicity and carcinogenicity of methyl mercury chloride in B6C3F1 mice. Fundam Appl Toxicol1990: 14: 179-190.
151.
Miyakawa T., Murayama E., Sumiyoshi S., Deshimaru M., and Fujimoto T.Late changes in human sural herves in Minamata disease and in nerves of rats with experimental organic mercury poisoning. Acta Neuropathol1976: 35: 131-138.
152.
Mohamed M., Burbacher T., and Mottet N.Effects of methyl mercury on testicular functions in Macaca fascicularis monkeys. Pharmacol Toxicol1987: 60: 29-36.
153.
Mottet N. K., Body R. L., Wilkens V., and Burbacher T. M.Biologic variables in the hair uptake of methylmercury from blood in the Macaque monkey. Environ Res1987: 42: 509-523.
154.
Munro I., Nera E., Charbonneau S., et al.Chronic toxicity of methyl mercury in the rat. J Environ Pathol Toxicol1980: 3: 437-447.
155.
Musch H., Bornhausen M., Kriegel H., and Greim H.Methylmercury chloride induces learning deficits in prenatally treated rats. Arch Toxicol1978: 40: 103-108.
156.
Myers G. J., Davidson P., Cox C., Shamlaye C. F., Choisy O., Cernichiari E., Choi A., Sloane-Reeves J., Axtell C., Gao P., and Clarkson T. W.The Seychelles Child Development Study: Results and new directions through twenty-nine months. In: Wheatley B., Wyzga R. (Eds.), Mercury as a Global Pollutant: Human Health IssuesKluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA, 1997a, pp. 53-61.
157.
Myers G. J., Davidson P., Shamlaye C., et al.Effects of prenatal methylmercury exposure from a high fish diet on developmental milestones in the Seychelles Child Development study. NeuroToxicology1997b: 18: 819-830.
158.
Myers G. J., Marsh D., Davidson P., Cox C., Shamlaye C., Tanner M., Choi A., Cernichiari E., Choisy O., and Clarkson T.Main neurodevelop-mental study of Seychellois children following in utero exposure to methylmercury from a maternal fish diet: outcome at six months. NeuroToxicology1995a: 16: 653-664.
159.
Myers G. J., Davidson P. W., Cox C., Shamlaye C. F., Tanner M. A., Choisy O., Sloane-Reeves J., Marsh D. O., Cernichiari E., Choi A., Berlin M., and Clarkson T. W.Neurodevelopmental outcomes of Seychellois children sixty-six months after in utero exposure to methylmercury from a maternal fish diet: pilot study. NeuroToxicology1995b: 16: 639-652.
160.
National Center for Health Statistics. Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988-91 (NHANES III), Version 1, September, 1995, Hyattsville, MD.
161.
National Research Council (NRC). Toxicological effects of methylmercury. Committee on the Toxicological Effects of Methylmercury, Board on Environmental Studies and toxicology, Commission on Life Sciences, National Research Council National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 2000.
162.
Newcomer P.L., and Harwitt D.D. The Test Language Development (TOLD) Empiric Press, Austin, TX, 1997, 40 pp. (As cited in Kjellstrom et al., 1989).
163.
Newland M., Yezhou S., Logdberg B., and Berlin M.Prolonged behavioral effects of in utero exposure to lead or methylmercury: Reduced sensitivity to changes in reinforcement contingencies during behavioral transitions and steady state. Toxicol Applied Pharmacol1994: 126: 6-15.
164.
Nolen G., Buchler E., Geil R., and Goldenthal E. I.Effects of trisodium nitrotriacetate on cadmium and methyl mercury toxicity and teratogenicity in rats. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol1972: 23: 222-237.
165.
Nordberg G., and Strangert P.Estimations of a dose-response curve for long-term exposure to methylmercuric compounds in human beings. In: Effects and Dose Response Relationships of Toxic MetalsElsevier Scientific Publishing Company, Amsterdam, 1976, pp. 273-282.
166.
NZCER. Burt Word Recognition Test, Revised New Zealand Centre for Education Research, Wellington, 1981, 51 pp. (As cited in Kjellstrom et al., 1989).
167.
Olson K., and Boush G.Decreased learning capacity in rats exposed prenatally and postnatally to low doses of mercury. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol1975: 13: 73-79.
168.
Pecoraro V., Barman J. M., and Astore I.The normal trichogram of pregnant women. In: Advances in Biology of SkinMontagna W., and Dobson R. L. (Eds.), Pergamon Press, Oxford, vol. 9, 1969, pp. 203-210.
169.
Pelfini C., Cerimele D., and Pisanu G.Aging of the skin and hair growth in man. In: Advances in Biology of SkinMontagna W., and Dobson R. L. (Eds.), Pergamon Press, Oxford, vol. 9, 1969, pp. 153-160.
170.
Phelps R., Clarkson T., Kershaw T., et al.Interrelationships of blood and hair mercury concentrations in a North American population exposed to methylmercury. Arch Environ Health1980: 35: 161-168.
171.
Pollock M. L., Laughridge E. E., Coleman B., Linnerud A. C., and Jackson A.Prediction of body density in young and middle-aged women. J Appl Physiol1975: 38: 745-749.
172.
Post E., Yang M., King J., and Sanger V. L.Behavioral changes of yung rats force-fed methyl mercury chloride. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med1973: 143: 1113-1116.
173.
Reuhl K. R., Chang L. W., and Townsend J. W.Pathological effects of in utero methylmercury exposure on the cerebellum of the golden hamster. Environ Res1981: 26: 281-306.
174.
Rhoades R., and Pflanzer R.Human Physiology Saunders College Publishing, Philadephia, 1989. Rice D.C. Schedule-controlled behavior in infant and juvenile monkeys exposed to lead from birth. NeuroToxicology1988: 9: 75-88.
175.
Rice D. C.Brain and tissue levels of mercury after chronic methyl mercury exposure in the monkey. J Toxicol Environ Health1989: 27: 189-198.
176.
Rice D. C.Effects of pre-plus postnatal exposure to methylmercury in the monkey on fixed interval and discrimination reversal performance. NeuroToxicology1992: 13: 443-452.
177.
Rice D. C.Sensory and cognitive effects of developmental methylmercury exposure in monkeys, and a comparison to effects in rodents. NeuroToxicology1996: 17: 139-154.
178.
Rice D. C., and Gilbert S. G.Early chronic low-level methylmercury poisoning in monkeys impairs spatial vision. Science1982: 216: 759-761.
179.
Rice D. C., and Gilbert S. G.Effects of developmental exposure to methylmercury on spatial and temporal visual function in monkeys. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol1990: 102: 151-163.
180.
Rice D. C., and Gilbert S. G.Exposure to methyl mercury from birth to adulthood impairs high-frequency hearing in monkeys. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol1992: 115: 6-10.
181.
Rice D. C., and Gilbert S. G.Effects of developmental methylmercury exposure or lifetime lead exposure on vibration sensitivity function in monkeys. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol1995: 134: 161-169.
182.
Rice D. C., Krewski D., Collins B. T., and Willes R. F.Pharmacokinetics of methylmercury in the blood of monkeys (Macaca fascicularis). Fundam Appl Toxicol1989: 12: 23-33.
183.
Robbins C. R.Chemical and Physical Behavior of Human Hair, 3rd ed.Springer-Verlag, New York, 1994, pp. 322-323.
184.
Rodier P. M., Aschner M., and Sager P. R.Mitotic arrest in the developing CNS after prenatal exposure to methyl mercury. Neurobehav Toxicol Teratol1984: 6: 379-385.
185.
Rushton H., James K. C., and Mortimer C. H.The unit area trichogram in the assessment of androgen-dependent alopecia. Br J Dermatol1983: 109: 429-437.
186.
Rushton D. H., Ramsay I. D., James K. C., Norris M. J., and Gilkes J. J. H.Biochemical and trichological characterization of diffuse alopecia in women. Br J Dermatol1990: 123: 187-197.
187.
Sager P.Selectivity of methylmercury effects on cytoskeleton and mitotic progression in cultured cells. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol1988: 94: 473-486.
188.
Sager P., Doherty R., and Olmsted J.Interaction of methylmercury with microtubules in cultured cells and in vitro. Exp Cell Res1983: 146: 127-137.
189.
Sager P., Doherty R., and Rodier P.Effects of methylmercury on developing mouse cerebellar cortex. Exp Neurol1982: 77: 179-193.
190.
Saitoh M., Uzuka M., Sakamoto H., and Kobori T.Rate of hair growth. In: Advances in Biology of SkinMontagna W., and Dobson R. L. (Eds.), Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1969, pp. 183-201.
191.
Sarafian T., and Verity A.Oxidative mechanisms underlying methyl mercury neurotoxicity. Int J Dev Neurosci1991: 9: 147-153.
192.
Sato T., and Ikuta F.Long-term studies on the neurotoxicity of small amount of methyl mercury in monkeys (first report). In: Tsubaki T. (Ed.), Studies on the Health Effects of Alkylmercury in JapanEnvironment Agency, Japan, 1975, pp. 63-70.
193.
Schantz S. L., Levin E. D., Bowman R. E., Heironimus M., and Laughlin N.Effects of perinatal PCB exposure on discrimation-reversal learning in monkeys. Neurotoxicol Teratol1989: 11: 243-250 (As cited in Rice, 1992).
194.
Schreiner G., Ulbrich B., and Bass R.Testing strategies in behavioral teratology. II. Discrimination learning. Neurobehav Toxicol Teratol1986: 8: 567-572.
195.
Seafood Safety. Committee on Evaluation of the Safety of Fishery Products, Chapter on Methylmercury: FDA Risk Assessment and Current Regulations National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1991, pp. 196-221.
196.
Shahristani H., and Shihab L. M.Variation of biological half-life of methylmercury in man. Arch Environ Health1974: 28: 342-344 (As cited in Cernichiari et al., 1995b).
197.
Shamlaye C., Marsh D., Myers G., et al.The Seychelles Child Development Study on neurodevelopmental outcomes in children following in utero exposure to methylmercury from a maternal fish diet: Background and demographics. NeuroToxicology1995: 16: 597-612.
198.
Sherlock J., Hislop J., Newton D., Topping G., and Whittle K.Elevation of mercury in human blood from controlled chronic ingestion of methylmercury in fish. Hum Toxicol1984: 3: 117-131.
199.
Sherlock J. C., Lindsay D. G., Evans W. H., Hislop J. E., and Collier T. R.Duplication diet study on mercury intake by fish consumers in the UK. Arch Environ Health1982: 37: 271-278 (As cited in USEPA, 1997).
200.
Skerfving S.Methylmercury exposure, mercury levels in blood and hair, and health status in Swedes consuming contaminated fish. Toxicology1974: 2: 3-23.
201.
Smith J., Allen P., Turner M., Most B., Fisher H., and Hall L.The kinetics of intravenously administered methyl mercury in man. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol1994: 128: 251-256.
202.
Soria M. L., Sanz P., Martinez D., et al.Total mercury and methylmercury in hair, maternal and umbilical blood, and placenta from women in the Seville area. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol1992: 48: 494-501 (As cited in USEPA, 1997).
203.
Spitzer W., Baxter D., Barrows H., et al.Methylmercury and the health of autochthons in northwest Quebec. Clin Invest Med1988: 11: 71-97.
204.
Spyker J. M.Assessing the impact of low level chemicals on development: behavioral and latent effects. Fed Proc1975: 34: 1835-1844.
205.
Spyker J. M., Sparber S. H., and Goldberg A. M.Subtle consequences of methylmercury exposure: behavioral deviations in offspring of treated mothers. Science1972: 177: 621-623.
206.
Stephens M.EDFJ Statistics for goodness of fit and some comparisons. J Amer Stat Assoc1974: 69: 730-737.
207.
Stern A. H.Estimation of the interindividual variability in the one-compartment pharmacokinetic model for methylmercury: implications for the derivation of a reference dose. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol1997: 25: 277-288.
208.
Stoltenburg-Didinger G., and Markwort S.Prenatal methyl mercury exposure results in dendritic spine dysgenesis in rats. Neurotoxicol Teratol1990: 12: 573-576.
209.
Sumari P., Backman A., Karli P., and Lahti A.Health studies of Finnish consumers of fish. Nord Hyg Tidskr1969: 50: 97-101.
210.
Sumino K., Hayakawa K., Shibata T., and Kitamura S.Heavy metals in normal Japanese Tissues. Amounts of 15 heavy metals in 30 subjects. Arch Environ Health1975: 30: 487-494.
211.
Suter K., and Schon H.Testing strategies in behavioral teratology. I. Testing battery approach. Neurobehav Toxicol Teratol1986: 8: 561-566.
212.
Tejning, 1967. (As cited in USEPA, 1997; vol. V, p. 6-24, no reference provided).
213.
Thuvander A., Sundberg J., and Oskarsson A.Immunomodulating effects after perinatal exposure to methylmercury in mice. Toxicology1996: 114: 163-175.
214.
Tokuomi H., Okajima T., and Mishima I.Minamata disease with a long-term follow-up. In: Tsubaki T. (Ed.), Studies on the Health Effects of Alkylmercury in JapanEnvironment Agency, Japan, 1975, pp. 167-174.
215.
Tsubaki, 1971a. (As cited in USEPA, 1997, vol. V, p. 6-22; no reference provided).
216.
Tsubaki 1971b. (As cited in USEPA, 1997, vol. V, p. 6-22; no reference provided).
217.
Tsubaki T., and Irukayama K.Clinical aspects of Minamata disease. In: Tsubaki T., and Irukayama K. (Eds.), Minamata DiseaseElsevier Scientific Publishing Company, New York, NY, 1977, pp. 143-267.
218.
Tsubaki T., Hirota K., Shirakawa K., Kondo K., and Sato T.Clinical, epidemiological and toxicological studies on methylmercury poisoning. In: Plaa, G. L., and Duncan W. (Eds.), Proceedings of the First International Congress on Toxicology. Academic Press, New York, 1978, pp. 339-357. (As cited in WHO, 1990).
219.
Turner M., March D., Smith J., Inglis J., et al.Methylmercury in populations eating large quantities of marine fish. Arch Environ Health1980: 35: 367-378.
220.
Tyning, 1967. (As cited in USEPA, 1997, vol. V, p. 6-22; no reference provided).
221.
USEPA. Ambient Water Quality Criteria Document for Mercury. EPA 440/5-80-058. Prepared by the Office of Health and Environmental Assessment, Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office, Cincinnati, OH for the Office of Water Regulation and Standards, Washington, DC, NTIS PB 81-117699, 1980.
222.
USEPA. General Quantitative Risk Assessment Guidelines for Noncancer Health Effects. ECAO-CIN-538. Prepared by the Technical Panel on Risk Assessment Guidelines for Noncancer Health Effects, October, 1988.
223.
USEPA. Final guidelines for exposure assessment; notice. Fed Regist 1992: 57(104): 22888-22939. May 19, 1992.
224.
USEPA. Guidelines for Reproductive Toxicity Risk Assessment. EPA/630/R-96/009. Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC, September, 1996.
225.
USEPA. Mercury Study Report to Congress. Volume V: Health Effects of Mercury and Mercury Compounds. EPA-452/R-97-007. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards and Office or Research and Development, December 1997.
226.
Vahter M., Mottet N., Friberg L., Lind B., Shen D., and Burbacher T.Speciation of mercury in the primate blood and brain following long-term exposure to methyl mercury. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol1994: 124: 221-229.
227.
Valciukas J., Levin S., Nicholson W., et al.Neurobehavioral assessment of Mohawk Indians for subclinical indications of methyl mercury neurotoxicity. Arch Environ Health1986: 41: 269-272.
228.
Vorhees C.Behavioral effects of prenatal methyl mercury in rats. A parallel trial to the collaborative behavioral teratology study. Neurobehav Toxicol Teratol1985: 7: 717-725.
229.
Wechsler D.Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children. Revised Manual Psychological Corporation, New York, 1974, 72-72 pp. (As cited in Kjellstrom et al., 1989).
230.
Weihe P., Grandjean P., Debes F., and White R.Health implications for Faroe Islanders of heavy metals and PCBs from pilot whales. Sci Total Environ1996: 186: 141-148.
231.
Weiss B., and Cory-Slechta D. A.Assessment of behavioral toxicity. In: Hayes A. W. (Ed.), Principles and Methods of Toxicology, 3rd ed.Raven Press, New York, 1994, pp. 1091-1155.
232.
Wheatley B., and Paradis S.Exposure of Canadian Aboriginal peoples to methylmercury. In: Porcella D. B., Huckabee J. W., and Wheatley B. (Eds.), Mercury as a Global PollutantKluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 1995, pp. 3-11.
233.
Wheatley B., and Paradis S.Balancing human exposure, risk and reality: questions raised by the Canadian Aboriginal Methylmercury Program. NeuroToxicology1996: 17: 241-250.
234.
Wheatley B., Barbeau A., Clarkson T., and Lapham L.Methylmercury poisoning in Canadian Indians—the elusive diagnosis. J Can Sci Neurol1979: 6: 417-422.
235.
Wheatley B., Paradis S., Lassonde M., Giguere M.-F., and Tanguay S.Exposure patterns and long term sequelae on adults and children in two Canadian indigenous communities exposed to methylmercury. In: Wheatley B., and Wyzga R. (Eds.), Mercury as a Global Pollutant: Human Health IssuesKluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA, 1997, pp. 63-73.
236.
White R. F., and Proctor S. P.Clinico-neuropsychological assessment methods in behavioral neurotoxicology. In: Chang L. W., and Slikker W. (Eds.), Neurotoxicology. Approaches and MethodsAcademic Press, New York, 1995, pp. 711-726.
237.
World Health Organization (WHO). Biological indicators of lead neurotoxicity in children. In: Studies in Epidemiology, Part 1. Interim Document 15. WHO, Regional Office of Europe, Copenhagen, 1984, pp. 63-138 (As cited in Kjellstrom et al., 1989).
238.
WHO. Methylmercury. Environmental Health Criteria 101WHO, Geneva, Switzerland, 1990.
239.
Yasuda Y., Datu A., Hirata S., and Fujimoto T.Characteristics of growth and palatal shelf development in ICF mice after exposure to methylmercury. Teratology1985: 32: 273-288.
240.
Yip R., and Chang L.Vulnerability of dorsal root neurons and fibers toward methylmercury toxicity. A morphological evaluation. Environ Res1981: 26: 152-167.
