I understand we are reviewing Nitrosamines in every walk of life, thanks to finding the unknown variable in pharmaceuticals. Food, cosmetics, alcohol, animal feed, water, I read we even have them in milk. We thought we had safe limits before and have to revise now. We are still assuming a person is not exposed to anything else harmful when assessing risk. This is not the case. We assess risk in healthy mice or bacteria in laboratory conditions. The fact is the environment around us contributes to risk. The safe limits in Switzerland or Sweden for example maybe very different to people living in the middle of Beijing or Delhi.
1 Like
Dear @Nox,
The Regulatory studies were designed in such a way that it assess the toxicological effects at certain doses to understand the toxicity of compound.
To address your point of view- studying a component hazard in healthy animal is definitely not the right way…But then what should be the right way as per your thoughts?
That’s why we are coming up with NAMs to address gaps. But still those testing’s are required now to address the case.
Definitely safe limit should vary with geography- Agree.
But just to harmonize things at global level to have uniform supply of products through out the globe, there should be alignment within different geography regulators for acceptable intakes.
1 Like