DRAFT
DO NOT QUOTE OR CITE
EPA/600/P-95/002Bb
August 1996
SAB Review Draft
EXPOSURE FACTORS HANDBOOK
VOLUME II of HI - FOOD INGESTION FACTORS
Update to Exposure Factors Handbook
EPA/600/8-89/043 - May 1989
NOTICE
THIS DOCUMENT IS A PRELIMINARY DRAFT. It has not been formally
released by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and should not at this
stage be construed to represent Agency policy. It is being circulated for
comments on its technical accuracy and policy implications.
Office of Research and Development
National Center for Environmental Assessment
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, DC 20460
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
EFH
DISCLAIMER
This document is a draft report subject to review by the Science Advisory Board, Mention of trade names
or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
Page
ft
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
EFH
FOREWORD
The National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA) of EPA's Office of Research and Development
(ORD) has five main functions: (1) providing risk assessment research, methods, and guidelines; (2) performing
health and ecological assessments; (3) developing, maintaining, and transferring risk assessment information and
training; (4) helping ORD set research priorities; and (5) developing and maintaining resource support systems for
NCEA. The activities under each of these functions are supported by and respond to the needs of the various
program offices. In relation to the first function, NCEA sponsors projects aimed at developing or refining techniques
used in exposure assessments.
This handbook was first published in 1989 to provide statistical data on the various factors used in assessing
exposure. This revised version of the handbook provides the up-to-date data on these exposure factors. The
recommended values are based solely on our interpretations of the available data. In many situations different values
may be appropriate to use in consideration of policy, precedent or odier factors.
Michael A. Callahan
Director
National Center for Environmental
Assessment, Washington Office
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
in
-------
EFH
PREFACE
The National Center for Environmental Assessment has prepared this handbook to address factors
commonly used in exposure assessments. This handbook was first published in 1989 in response to requests from
many EPA Program and Regional offices for additional guidance on how to select values for exposure factors.
Several events sparked the efforts to revise the Exposure Factors Handbook. First, since its publication in
1989, new data have become available. Second, the Risk Assessment Council issued a memorandum titled,
"Guidance on Risk Characterization for Risk Managers and Risk Assessors", dated February 26, 1992 which
emphasized the use of multiple descriptors of risk (i.e., a measure of tendency such as average or mean central
tendency, high end of individual risk, population risk, important subpopulations). Third, EPA published the revised
Guidelines for Exposure Assessment.
As pan of the efforts to revise the handbook, the EPA Risk Assessment Forum sponsored a two-day peer
involvement workshop which was conducted during the summer of 1993. The workshop was attended by 57
scientists from academia, consulting firms, private industry, the states, and other Federal agencies. The purpose of
the workshop was to identify new data sources, to discuss adequacy of the data and the feasibility of developing
statistical distributions and to establish priorities.
As a result of the workshop, two new chapters have been added to the handbook. These chapters are:
Consumer Product Use and the Reference Residence. This document also provides a summary of the available data
on consumption of drinking water; consumption of fruits, vegetables, beef, dairy products, and fish; soil ingestion;
inhalation rates; skin surface area; soil adherence; lifetime; activity patterns; and body weight.
Page
iv
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
EFH
AUTHORS, CONTRIBUTORS, AND REVIEWERS
The National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA), Office of Research and Development was
responsible for the preparation of this handbook. The original document was prepared by Versar Inc. under EPA
Contract No-, 68-02-4254, Work Assignment No. 189, John Schaum, of NCEA-Washington Office, served as the
EPA Work Assignment Manager, providing overall direction and coordination of the production effort as well as
technical assistance and guidance. Revisions, updates, and additional preparation were provided by Versar Inc.
under Contract Numbers 68-DO-0101, 68-D3-0013, and 68-D5-0051. Russell Kinerson and Greg Kew have served
as EPA Work Assignment Managers during previous efforts of the update process. Jackie Moya served as Work
Assignment Manager for the current updated version, providing overall direction, technical assistance, and serving as
contributing author.
AUTHORS
Patricia Wood
Linda Phillips
Aderohke Adenuga
Mike Koontz
Harry Rector
Charles Wilkes
Margaret Wilson
DESKTOP PUBLISHING
Susan Perry
WORD PROCESSING
Valerie Schwartz
GRAPHICS
Kathy Bowles
Jennifer Baker
Exposure Assessment Division
Versar Inc.
Springfield, VA
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
. v
-------
EFH
CONTRIBUTORS AND REVIEWERS
The following EPA individuals have reviewed and/or have been contributing authors of this document.
Michael Dellarco
Robert McGaughy
Amy Mills
Jacqueline Moya
Susan Perlin
Paul Pinsky
John Schaum
Paul White
Amina Wilkins
Chieh Wu
An earlier draft of this document was peer reviewed by a panel of experts at a peer-review workshop held in
1995. Members of the Peer Review Panel were as follows:
Edward Avol
Department of Preventive Medicine
School of Medicine
University of Southern California
James Axley
School of Architecture
Yale University
David Burmaster
Alceon Corporation
Steven Colome
Integrated Environmental Services
Michael DiNovi
Chemistry Review Branch
U.S. Food & Drug Administration
Dennis Druck
Environmental Scientist
Center of Health Promotion & Preventive
Medicine
U.S. Army
J. Mark Fly
Department of Forestry, Wildlife, & Fisheries
University of Tennessee
Larry Gephart
Exxon Biomedical Sciences, Inc.
Patricia Guenther
Beltsville Human Nutrition Research Center
U.S. Department of Agriculture
P.J. (Bert) Hakkinen
Paper Product Development & Paper Technology
Divisions
The Proctor & Gamble Company
Mary Kama
Beltsville Human Nutrition Research Center
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Dennis Jones
Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry
John Kissel
Department of Environmental Health
School of Public Health & Community Medicine
Neil Klepeis
Information Systems & Services, Inc.
Andrew Persily
National Institute of Standards & Technologies
Barbara Petersen
Technical Assessment Systems, Inc.
Thomas Phillips
Research Division
California Air Resources Board
Paul Price
ChemRisk
John Risher
Division of Toxicology
The Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry
Page
VI
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
EFH
John Robinson
University of Maryland
Peter Robinson
The Proctor & Gamble Company
P. Barry Ryan
Department of Environmental & Occupational
Health
Rollins School of Public Health
Emory University
Val Schaeffer
U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission
BradShurdut
DowElanco
JohnTalbott
U.S. Department of Energy
Frances Vecchio
Beltsville Human Nutrition Research Center
U.S. Department of Agriculture
The following individuals within EPA have reviewed an earlier draft of this document arid provided valuable
comments: ' .
OFFICE
REVIEWERS/CONTRIBUTORS
Office of Research and Development
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response
Office of Pollution, Pesticides arid Toxic
Substances
Maurice Berry
Jerry Blaiicato
Elizabeth Bryan
Curtis Dary
Stan Durkee
Manuel Gomez
Wayne Marchant
Sue Perlin
James Quanckenboss
Glen Rice
Lance Wallace
Jim Konz
Pat .Kennedy
Cathy Fehrenbacker
Office of Water
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
EPA Regions
Denis Borum
Warren Peters
Steve Ehlers - Reg. VI
Maria Martinez - Reg. VI
Mike Morton - Reg. VI
Jeffrey Yurk - Reg. VI
Youngmoo Kim - Reg. VI
In addition, the National Exposure Research Laboratory (NERL) of the Office of Research and
Development of EPA made an important contribution to this handbook by conducting additional analysis of the
National Human Activity Pattern Survey (NHAPS) data. EPA input to the NHAPS data analysis came from Karen
A. Hammerstrom and Jacqueline Moya from NCEA-Washington Office; William C. Nelson from NERL-RTP, and
Stephen C. Hern, Joseph V. Behar (retired), and William H. Englemann from NERL-Las Vegas.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
vii
-------
EFH
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION 1-1
I.I. PURPOSE 1-1
1.2. INTENDED AUDIENCE .1-1
1.3. BACKGROUND 1-1
1.3.1. Selection of Studies for the Handbook 1-1
1.3.2. Using the Handbook in an Exposure Assessment 1-3
1.3.3. Approach Used to Develop Recommendations for Exposure Factors 1-4
1.3.4. Characterizing Variability 1-5
1.4. GENERAL EQUATION FOR CALCULATING DOSE 1-10
1.5. RESEARCH NEEDS 1-12
1.6. ORGANIZATION '. 1-12
1.7. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 1 1-13
APPENDIX 1A 1A-1
2. ANALYSIS OF UNCERTAINTY .,.. 2-1
2.1. CONCERN ABOUT UNCERTAINTY 2-1
2.2. UNCERTAINTY VERSUS VARIABILITY 2-2
2.3. TYPES OF UNCERTAINTY 2-2
2.4. TYPES OF VARIABILITY 2-4
2.5. METHODS OF ANALYZING UNCERTAINTY AND VARIABILITY 2-5
2.6. PRESENTING RESULTS OF UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS 2-8
2.7. REFERENCES FORCHAPTER2 2-9
3. DRINKING WATER INTAKE 3-1
3.1. BACKGROUND 3-1
3.2. KEY GENERAL POPULATION STUDIES ON DRINKING WATER INTAKE 3-1
3.3. RELEVANT GENERAL POPULATION STUDIES ON DRINKING WATER INTAKE . . 3-10
3.4. PREGNANT AND LACTATING WOMEN . ." 3-21
3.5. HIGH ACTIVITY LEVELS/HOT CLIMATES 3-23
3.6. RECOMMENDATIONS '. .' 3-25
3.7. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 3 3-31
4. SOIL INGESTION AND PICA 4-1
4.1 BACKGROUND 4-1
4.2. KEY STUDIES ON SOIL INTAKE AMONG CHILDREN 4-1
4.3. RELEVANT STUDIES ON SOIL INTAKE AMONG CHILDREN . 4-11
4.4. SOIL INTAKE AMONG ADULTS 4-17
4.5. PREVALENCE OF PICA 4-18
4.6. DELIBERATE SOIL INGESTION AMONG CHILDREN 4-19
4.7. RECOMMENDATIONS 4-19
4.8. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 4 4-24
Page
viii
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
EFH
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
Page No.
5. INHALATION ROUTE - :.- .-; ' ~ '
5.1. EXPOSURE EQUATION FOR INHALATION -j-1
, 5:2. INHALATION RATE ....,. J>-1
5.3. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS , : 5-5
APPENDIX 5A ." . 5A-1
6. DERMAL ROUTE : 6'\
6.1. EQUATION FOR DERMAL DOSE . . ^
6.2. SURFACE AREA ..'.. ฐ'*
i 6.3. DERMAL ADHERENCE TO SOIL ฐ-P
, 6.4. RECOMMENDATIONS : -. ฐ'ฐ
6.5. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 6 ' ..,.., 6-9'
APPENDIX 6A 6A-1
7. BODY WEIGHT STUDIES ;..... 7-1
7.1. KEY BODY WEIGHT STUDY -: 7''
7.2. RELEVANTBODY WEIGHT STUDIES 7-6
7.3. RECOMMENDATIONS 7'7
7.4. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 7 : ....7-7
-8. LIFETIME S'\
8.1. KEY STUDY ON LIFETIME ฐ'1
8.2. RECOMMENDATIONS 8''
8.3. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 8 8-'
9. INTAKE OF FRUITS AND VEGETABLES - > 9''
9.1. BACKGROUND 9-1
9.2. INTAKE STUDIES 9-2
9.3. RECOMMENDATIONS 9'8
9.4. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 9 9'9
QA 1
APPENDIX 9A ^"
APPENDIX 9B 9B"'
10. INTAKE OF FISH AND SHELLFISH
10.1. BACKGROUND
10.2. KEY GENERAL POPULATION STUDIES 1Q-2
10.3. RELEVANT GENERAL POPULATION STUDIES 10"12
10.4. KEY RECREATIONAL (MARINE FISH STUDIES) !0-17
10 5 RELEVANT RECREATIONAL MARINE STUDIES : 10-22
10.6. KEY FRESHWATER RECREATIONAL STUDIES 10-26
10.7. RELEVANT FRESHWATER RECREATIONAL STUDIES . . . : . 10-34
10.8. NATIVE AMERICAN FRESHWATER STUDIES 10-36
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
IX
-------
EFH
TABLE OF CONTENTS (contirtued)
10.9 OTHER FACTORS 1Q-44
10.10. RECOMMENDATIONS - -' 1Q-49
10.11 REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 10 10-52
APPENDIX 10A ; 10A-'
APPENDIX 10B 10B-'
APPENDIX IOC 10C-'
11. INTAKE OF MEAT AND DAIRY PRODUCTS H-l
11.1. INTAKE STUDIES H-l
11.2. FAT CONTENT OF MEAT AND DAIRY PRODUCTS 11-5
11.3. CONVERSION BETWEEN AS CONSUMED AND DRY WEIGHT INTAKE RATES 11-6
11.4. RECOMMENDATIONS ., H'6
11.5. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 11 ' H"7
APPENDIX 11A - -
12. INTAKE RATES FOR VARIOUS HOME PRODUCED FOOD ITEMS 12-1
12.1. BACKGROUND " m
12.2. METHODS 12'2
12.3. RESULTS 12'8
12.4. ADVANTAGES AND LIMITATIONS 12-9
12.5. RECOMMENDATIONS I2'9
12.6. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 12 - .- 12-10
APPENDIX 12A 12A''
13. BREAST MILK INTAKE 13'1
13.1. BACKGROUND ...' 13'!
13.2. KEY STUDIES ON BREAST MILKINTAKE 13-1
13.3. OTHER RELEVANT STUDIES ON BREAST MILK INTAKE 13-4
13.4. KEY STUDIES ON LIPID CONTENT AND FAT INTAKE FROM BREAST MILK 13-5
13.5. OTHER FACTORS 13'6
13.6. RECOMMENDATIONS 13'8
13.7 REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 13 13-1ฐ
14. ACTIVITY FACTORS I4~l
14.1. ACTIVITY PATTERNS 14-J
14.2. OCCUPATIONAL MOBILITY 14-10
14.3. POPULATION MOBILITY I4'11
14.4. RECOMMENDATIONS 14"14
14.5. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 1 14-16
APPENDIX 14A 14A-j
APPENDIX 14B 14B"1
Page
x
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
EFH
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
Page No.
15. CONSUMER PRODUCTS.. 1M
15.1. BACKGROUND 13"1
15.2. KEY CONSUMER PRODUCTS USE STUDIES . 15-1
15.3. RELEVANT CONSUMER PRODUCTS USE STUDY 15-4
15.4. RECOMMENDATIONS - 15'5
15.5. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 15 I5'5
APPENDIX ISA
15A-1
; 16-1
INTRODUCTION 16-1
BUILDING CHARACTERISTICS . . . > 16'2
TRANSPORT RATES 16-g
SOURCES : 16/;2
ADVANCED CONCEPTS . 16:4
RECOMMENDATIONS - -. 16:'3
REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 16 - 16'-5
16. REFERENCE RESIDENCE
16.1.
16.2.
16.3.
16.4.
16.5.
16.6
16.7.
GLOSSARY
G-l
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
xi
-------
EFH.
LIST OF TABLES
Page No.
Table 1-1. Considerations Used to Rate Confidence in Recommended Values 1-6
Table 1-2. Summary of Exposure Factor Recommendations, and Confidence Ratings 1-7
Table 1-3. Characterization of Variability in Exposure Factors 1-9
Table 1A-1. Procedures for Modifying IRIS Risk Values for Non-standard
Populations , -. *A-4
Table 2-1. Three Types of Uncertainty and Associated Sources and Examples 2-3
Table 2-2. Approaches to Quantitative Analysis of Uncertainty 2-6
Table 3-1. Daily Total Tapwater Intake Distribution for Canadians, by Age Group
(Approx. 0.20 L Increments, Both Sexes, Combined Seasons) 3-2
Table 3-2, Average Daily Tapwater Intake of Canadians (expressed as milliliters
per kilogram body weight) 3-3
Table 3-3. Average Daily Total Tapwater Intake of Canadians, by Age and
Season (L/day) , , 3'4
Table 3-4. Average Daily Total Tapwater Intake of Canadians as a Function of
Level of Physical Activity at Work and in Spare Time (16 years and
Older, Combined Seasons, L/day) ' 3~4
Table 3-5. Average Daily Tapwater Intake Apportioned Among Various
Beverages (Both Sexes, by Age, Combined Seasons, L/day) 3-5
Table 3-6. Total Tapwater Intake (mL/day) for Both Sexes Combined 3-6
Table 3-7. Total Tapwater Intake (mL/kg-day) for Both Sexes Combined 3-7
Table 3-8. Summary of Tapwater Intake by Age 3'8
Table 3-9. Total Tapwater Intake (as Percent of Total Water Intake) by Broad
Age Category 3~8
Table 3-10. General Dietary Sources of Tapwater for Both Sexes 3-9
Table 3-11. Summary Statistics for Best-Fit Lognormal Distributions for Water
Intake Rates . . . . ;....., 3-10
Table 3-12. Estimated Quantiles and Means for Total Tapwater Intake
Rates (mL/day) 3-1 *
Table 3-13. Average Total Tapwater Intake Rate by Sex, Age, and Geographic
Area 3'n
Table 3-14. Frequency Distribution of Total Tapwater Intake Rates . .- 3-12
Table 3-15. Intake Rates of Total Fluids and Total Tapwater by Age Group 3-12.
Table 3-16. Mean Per Capita Drinking Water Intake Based on USDA, CSFII Data
From 1989-91 (mL/day) ...,..,... ... r ........ 3-13
Table 3-17. Assumed Tapwater Content of Beverages 3'14
Table 3-18. Intake of Total Liquid, Total Tapwater, and Various Beverages
(L/day) ' 3"16
Table 3-19. Summary of Total Liquid and Total Tapwater Intake for Males
and Females (L/day) 3'17
Table 3-20. Mean and Standard Error for the Daily Intake of
Beverages and Tapwater by Age - 3'1ฐ
Table 3-21. Measured Fluid Intakes (mL/day) 3'18
Table 3-22. Number of Glases of Tapwater Consumed in 24-Hour Period 3-19
Page
xii
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 3-23. Number of Glasses of Juice Reconstituted with Tapwater Consumed
in 24-Hour Period - .-'. 3-20
'Table 3-24. fotal Fluid Intake of Women 15-49 Years Old : 3'--
Table 3-25. Total Tapwater Intake of Women 15-49 Years Old 3'
Table 3-26. Total Fluid (mL/Day) Derived from Various Dietary Sources by
Women Aged 15-49 Years ^--3
Table 3-27. Water Intake at Various Activity Levels (L/hr) . 3--4
Table 3-28. Planning Factors for Individual Tapwater Consumption 3-_5
Table 3-29. Drinking Water Intake Surveys - ' ^-26
Table 3-30. Summary of Recommended Drinking Water Intake Rates 3--9
Table 3-31. Confidence in Tapwater Intake Recommendations 3'30
Table 4-1. Distribution of Average.(Mean) Daily Soil Ingestion Estimates
per Child for 64 Children 4-
Table 4-2. Estimated Distribution of Individual Mean Daily Soil Ingestion Based
on Data for 64 Subjects 4~2
Table 4-3. Estimated Daily Soil Ingestion Based on Aluminum, Silicon, and
Titanium Concentrations
Table 4-4. Calculated Soil Ingestion by Nursery School Children , 4-5
Table 4-5. Calculated Soil Ingestion by Hospitalized, Bedridden Children 4-5
Table 4-6. Geometric Mean (GM) and Standard Deviation (GSD) LTM Values
. for Childrenat Daycare Centers and Campgrounds 4'6
Table 4-7. Estimated Geometric Mean LTM Values of Children Attending
Day-Care Centers According to Age, Weather Category, and
Sampling Period ,
Table 4-8. Average Daily Soil Ingestion Values Based on Aluminum, Silicon,
and Titanium as Tracer Elements 4-8
Table 4-9. Mean and Standard Deviation Percentage Recovery of Eight
Tracer Elements . . . . ..' 4-9
Table 4-10. Soil and Dust Ingestion Estimates for Children Aged 1-4 Years 4-10
Table 4-11. Estimated Soil Ingestion Rate Summary Statistics and
Parameters for Distributions Using Binder et al. (1986) Data
with Actual Fecal Weights 4-12
Table 4-12. Estimates of Soil Ingestion for Children . 4'13
Table 4-13. Tukey's Multiple Comparison of Mean Log Tracer Recovery in
Adults Ingesting Known Quantities of Soil 4-14
Table 4-14. Positive/Negative Error (bias) in Soil Ingestion Estimates in the
Calabrese etal. (1989) Mass-balance Study 4"15
Table 4-15. Soil Ingestion Rates for Assessment Purposes - 4'16
Table 4-16. Estimates of Soil Ingestion for Adults 4'17
Table 4-17. Adult Daily Soil Ingestion by Week and Tracer Element After
Subtracting Food and Capsule Ingestion, Based on Median Amherst
Soil Concentrations: Means and Medians Over Subjects (mg) 4-18
Table 4-18. Daily Soil Ingestion Estimation in a Soil-Pica Child by Tracer and
. by Week(mg/day) '.
Table 4-19. Ratios of Soil, Dust, and Residual Fecal Samples in the Pica Child - -
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
xiii
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Table 4-20, Soil Intake Studies ,-- ., < - = -..= = :.-..-..: . :.. : -..-. :..:..-. |:,sl '-
Table 4-21. Confidence in Soil Intake Recommendation . . , ...,. .......... ..... -... .... .T.v.3.
Table 4-22. Summary of Recommended Values for Soil .Ingestion , 4'-4
Table 5-1. Comparisons of Estimated Basal Metabolic Rates (BMR) with
Average Food-energy Intakes for Individuals Sampled in
the 1977-78 NFCS ^-3
Table 5-2. Daily Inhalation Rates Calculated from Food-Energy Intakes 5-4
Table 5-3. Daily Inhalation Rates Obtained from the Ratios Of Total
Energy Expenditure to Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR) 5-5
Table 5-4. Daily Inhalation Rates Based on Time-Activity Survey 5-7
Table 5-5. Inhalation Rates for Short-Term Exposures S'6
Table 5-6. Calibration and Field Protocols for Self-Monitoring of Activities
Grouped by Subject Panels , 5"9
Table 5-7. Subject Panel Inhalation Rates (IR) by Mean IR, Upper
Percentiles, and Self-Estimated Breathing Rates 5-9
Table 5-8. Distributions of Individual and Group Inhalation/Ventilation Rate for
Outdoor Workers 5"10
Table 5-9. Individual Mean Inhalation Rate (mVhr) by Self-Estimated
Breathing Rate or Job Activity Category for Outdoor Workers 5-11
Table 5-10. Distribution of HR and Predicted IR, by Location and Activity Levels
for Elementary (EL) and High School (HS) Students - 5"12
Table 5-11. Average Hours Spent per Day in a Given Location and Activity
Level for Elementary (EL) and High School (HS) Students 5-13
Table 5-12. Distribution Patterns of Daily Inhalation Rates for Elementary (EL)
and High School Students (HS) Grouped by Activity Level 5-13
Table 5-13. Summary of Average Inhalation Rates (m3/hr) by Age Group and
Activity Levels for Laboratory Protocols
Table 5-14. Summary of Average Inhalation Rates (mVhr) by Age Group and
Activity Levels in Field Protocols 5"15
Table 5-15. Distribution Pattern of Predicted VR and EVR (Equivalent
Ventilation Rate) for Outdoor Workers 5"17
Table 5-16. Distribution Pattern of Inhalation Rate by Location and sis
Activity Type for Outdoor Workers f/15
Table 5-17. Actual Inhalation Rates Measured at Four Ventilation Levels ->-ls
Table 5-18. Summary of Human Inhalation Rates for Men, Women, and Children
by Activity Level (mVhour) 5"19
Table 5-19. Activity Pattern Data Aggregated for Three Microenvironments
by Activity Level for all Age Groups 5"-u
Table 5-20. Summary of Daily Inhalation Rates Grouped by Age and Activity
ft , J~ฃ\J
Level -n
Table 5-21. Daily Inhalation Rates Estimated From Daily Activities ^
Table 5-22. Confidence in Inhalation Rate Recommendations 5--1
Table 5-23. Summary of Recommended Values for Inhalation 5-2-
Table 5-24. Summary of Inhalation Rate Studies ->~-J
Page
xiv
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
APPENDIX 5A
Table 5A-1. Statistics of the Age/Gender Cohorts Used to Develop Regression
Equations for Predicting Basal Metabolic Rates (BMR)
(from Schofield, 1985) : 5A-3
Table 5A-2. Characteristics of Individual Subjects: Anthropometric Data,
Job Categories, Calibration Results 5A-3
Table 5A-3. Mean Minute Ventilation (VE, L/min) by Group and Activity for
Laboratory Protocols .....:..,... 5A-4
Table 5A-4. Mean Minute Ventilation (VE, L/min) by Group and Activity for
Field Protocols ' ' 5A-4
Table 5A-5. Estimated Minute Ventilation Associated with Activity Level for
Average Male Adult ,..' 5A-5
Table 5A-6. Minute Ventilation Ranges by Age, Sex, and Activity Level 5A-6
Table 5A-7. Reference Values Obtained From Various Literature Sources 5A-7
Table 6-1. Summary of Equation Parameters for Calculating Adult Body
Surface Area 6-12
Table 6-2. Surface Area of Adult Males in Square Meters 6-13
Table 6-3. Surface Area of Adult Females in Square Meters . 6-13
Table 6-4. Surface Area of Body part for Adults (nr) ; . - . 6-14
Table 6-5. Percentage of Total Body Surface Area by Part for Adults 6-14
Table 6-6. Total Body Surface Area of Male Children in Square Meters 6-15
Table 6-7. Total Body Surface Area of Female Children in Square Meters 6-15
Table 6-8. Percentage of Total Body Surface Area by Body Part for Children 6-16
Table 6-9. Descriptive Statistics for Surface Area/BodyWeight Ratios (nr/kg) 6-17
Table 6-10. . Statistical Results for Total Body Surface Area Distributions (nr) = .6-17
Table 6-11. - Skin Coverage with Soil by Body Part and Activity :..... 6-17
Table6-12. Summary of Field Studies 6-20
Table 6-13. Mean Soil Adherence by Activity and Body Region 6-21
Table 6-14. Surface Area Studies ../....... 6-22
Table 6-15. Summary of Recommended Values for Skin Surface Area 6-23
Table 6-16. Confidence in Body Surface Area Measurement Recommendation 6-23
Table 6-17. Confidence in Dermal Adherence Recommendations . . . . : . 6-24
Table 6-18. Summary of Soil Adherence Studies 6-25
Table 6-A1. Estimated Parameter Values for Different Age Intervals 6-A5
Table 6-A2. Summary of Surface Area Parameter Values for the DuBois and
DuBois Model 6-A6
Table 7-1. Body Weights of Adults (kilograms) '.". 7-1
Table 7-2. Body Weights of Children (kilograms) 7-1
Table 7-3. Weight in Kilograms for Males 18-74 Years of Age-Number
Examined, Mean, Standard Deviation, and Selected Percentiles,
by Race and Age: United States, 1976-1980 7-2
Table 7-4. Weight in Kilograms for Females 18-74 Years of Age-Number
Examined, Mean, Standard Deviation, and Selected Percentiles,
by Race and Age: United States, 1976-1980 7-3
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
. xv
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Table 7-5. Weight in Kilograms for Males 6 Months-19 Years of Age--
Number Examined, Mean, Standard Deviation, and Selected
Percentiles, by Sex and Age: United States, 1976-1980 7-4
Table 7-6. Weight in Kilograms for Females 6 Months-19 Years of Age-
Number Examined, Mean, Standard Deviation, and Selected
Percentiles, by Sex and Age: United States, 1976-1980 - 7"5
Table 7-7. Statistics for Probability Plot Regression Analyses
Female's Body Weights 6 Months to 20 Years of Age '-6
Table 7-8. Statistics for Probability Plot Regression Analyses
Male's Body Weights 6 Months to 20 Years of Age 7'6
Table 7-9. . Summary of Body Weight Studies J"ฎ
Table 7-10. Summary of Recommended Values for Body Weight 7~8
Table 7-11. Confidence in Body Weight Recommendations 7'14
Table 8-1. Expectation of Life at Birth, 1970 to 1993, and Projections,
1995 tO 2010 . .. ,.- ...., ,.-.-..,..= -. r .-..: .:..: :. :.; ; .;.: : .: :. : "... j
Table 8-2. Confidence in Lifetime Expectancy Recommendations ป-J
Table 9-1. Sub-category Codes and Definitions Used in the CSFII
1989-91 Analysis 9~ ,
Table 9-2. Weighted and Unweighted Number of Observations for CSFII Data
Used in Analysis of Food Intake - ,...... 9;ฃ
Table 9-3, Intake of Total Fruits (g/kg-day) - |r|^
Table 9-4. Intake of Total Vegetables (g/kg-day) ^1-
Table 9-5. Intake of Individual Fruits and Vegetables (g/kg-day) 9-1-'
Table 9-6. Intake of USDA Categories of Fruits and Vegetables (g/kg-day) 9-19
Table 9-7. Intake of Exposed, Protected, and Root Fruits and
Vegetables (g/kg-day) ,- -. 9--0
Table 9-8. Quantity ("as consumed") of Fruits and Vegetables Consumed
Per Eating Occasion and the Percentage of Individuals Using
These Foods in 3 Days """1
Table 9-9. Mean Per Capita Intake Rates (as consumed) for Fruits and
Vegetables Based on All Sex/Age/Demographic Subgroups 9-22
Table 9-10. Mean Total Fruit Intake in a Day by Sex and Age (1977-1978) 9--9
Table 9-11. Mean Total Fruit Intake in a Day by Sex and Age (1987-1988) , 9-29
Table 9-12. Mean Total Vegetable Intake in a Day by Sex and Age (1977-1978) 9-30
Table 9-13. Mean Total Vegetable Intake in a Day by Sex and Age (1987-1988) 9-30
Table 9-14. Mean and Standard Error for the Per Capita Daily Intake of
Food Class and Subclass by Region (g/day ."as consumed") 9-31
Table 9-15. Mean and Standard Error for the Daily Intake of Food
Subclasses Per Capita by Age (g/day "as consumed") 9'j2
Table 9-16. Consumption of Foods (g dry weight/day) for Different Age Groups
and Estimated Lifetime Average Daily Food Intakes for a US Citizen
(averaged across sex) Calculated from the FDA Diet Data 9'33
Table 9-17. ' Mean Daily Intake of Foods (grams) Based on the Nutrition
Canada Dietary Survey
Page
xvi
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 9-18. Per Capita Consumption of Fresh Fruits and Vegetables in 1991 . . . 9-34
Table 9-19. Mean Moisture Content of Selected Fruits, Vegetables, and Grains
Expressed as Percentages of Edible Portions .- ^--^
Table 9-20. Summary of Fruit and Vegetable Intake Studies "08
Table 9-21. Summary of Recommended Values for Per Capita Intake
of Fruits and Vegetables and Serving Size - ; 9-39
Table 9-22. Confidence in Fruit and Vegetable Intake Recommendations . . . / 9-40
Table 9-23. Confidence in Fruits and Vegetable Serving Size Recommendations :..... 9-41
Table 9A-1. Fraction of Grain and Meat Mixture Intake Represented by
Various Food Items/Groups 9A-3
Table 10-1. Total Fish Consumption by Demographic Variables 0-3
Table 10-2. Mean and 95th Percentile of Fish Consumption (g/day) by Sex and Age - - 10-4
Table 10-3. Percent Distribution of Total Fish Consumption for Females by Age . . : 10-5
Table 10-4. Percent Distribution of Total Fish Consumption for Males by Age 10-5
Table 10-5. Mean Total Fish Consumption by Species - :
Table 10-6. Best Fits of Lognormal Distributions Using the NonLiner
Optimization (NLO) Method ,
Table 10-7. Per Capita Fish Consumption Rates (g/day) By Habitat and Fish Type (Uncooked Fish Weights
Table 10-8. Distribution of Fish Intake (grams) Per Day Consuming Fish,
By Habitat (Uncooked Fish Weight) . . , 10-9
Table 10-9. Per Capita Fish Consumption Rates (milligrams/kg-day) By Habitat
and Fish Type (Uncooked Fish Weight) .;.-......,....< ' 1Q-9
Table 10-10. Distribution of Fish Intake (milligrams/kg) Per Day Coasuming
Fish, By Habitat (Uncooked Fish Weight) '-. lฐ-10
Table 10-11. Per Capita Fish Consumption rates (g/day) By Habitat and Fish
Type (Cooked Fish Weight) 1(MO
Table 10-12. Distribution of Fish Intake (grams) Per Day Consuming Fish,
By Habitat (Cooked Fish Weight) - 10-n
Table 10-13. Distribution of Quantity of Fish Consumed (in grams) Per Eating
Occasion, By Age and Sex -
Table 10-14 Percent of Population That Ate Seafood (Including Shellfish, Eels,
or Squid)
Table 10-15. Number of Servings of Seafood Consumed -
Table 10-16. Frequency of Seafood That Was Consumed Being Purchased or
Caught By Someone They Knew 10~|5
Table 10-17. Mean Fish Intake in a Day, by Sex and Age - .' :. 10-16
Table 10-18. Estimated Number of Participants in Marine Recreational Fishing by
State and Subregion - - .-'-' lฐ~19
Table 10-19. Estimated Weight of Fish Caught (Catch Type A and Bl) by _
Marine Recreational Fishermen by Wave and Subregion 10--0
Table 10-20. Average Daily Intake (g/day) of Marine Finfish, by Region and
Coastal Status - - 1(>20
Table 10-21. Estimated Weight of Fish Caught (Catch Type A and Bl) by
Marine Recreational Fishermen by Species Group and Subregion,
Atlantic and Gulf . lฐ-21
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996 __,
Page
xvii
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Table 10-22. Estimated Weight of Fish Caught (Catch Type A and Bl) by
Marine Recreational Fishermen by Species Group and Subregion,
Pacific '. 10-21
Table 10-23. Median Intake Rates Based on Demographic Data of Sport Fishermen
and Their Family/Living Group 10-22
Table 10-24. Cumulative Distribution of Total Fish/Shellfish Consumption by
Surveyed Sport Fishermen in the Metropolitan Los Angeles Area ; 10-23
Table 10-25. Catch Information for Primary Fish Species Kept by Sport Fishermen 10-23
Table 10-26. Percent of Fishing Frequency During the Summer and Fall Seasons
in Commencement Bay, Washington 10-24
Table 10-27. Selected Percentile Coasumption Estimates (g/d) for the Survey and
Total Angler Populations Based on the Reanalysis of the Puffer and
Pierce Data 10-24
Table 10-28. Means and Standard Deviations of Selected Characteristics by
Subpopulation Groups in Everglades, Florida 10-25
Table 10-29. Estimates of Fish Intake Rates of Licensed Sport Anglers in Maine
During the 1989-1990 Ice Fishing or 1990 Open-Water Seasons 10-27
Table 10-30. Analysis of Fish Consumption by Ethnic Groups for "All Waters"
(g/day) 10-27
Table 10-31. Total Consumption of Freshwater Fish Caught by All Survey
Respondents During the 1990 Season 10-28
Table 10-32. Mean Fish Intake Among Individuals Who Eat Fish and Reside in Households With
Recreatoinal Fish Consumption 10-30
Table 10-33. Comparison of Seven-Day Recall and Estimated Seasonal Frequency
for Fish Consumption 10-30
Table 10-34. Distribution of Usual Fish Intake Among Survey Main Respondents
Who Fished and Consumed Recreationally Caught Fish 10-31
Table 10-35. Mean Sport-Fish Consumption by Demographic Variables, Michigan
Spon Anglers Fish Consumption Study, 1991 - 1992 10-32
Table 10-36. Distribution of Fish Intake Rates (from all sources and from
sport-caught sources) for 1992 Lake Ontario Anglers 10-34
Table 10-37. Mean Annual Fish Consumption (g/day) for Lake Ontario Anglers,
1992, by Socio-demographic Characteristics 10-34
Table 10-38. Percentile and Mean Intake Rates for Wisconsin Sport Anglers 10-35
Table 10-39. Socio-Demographic Characteristics of Respondents 10-36
Table 10-40. Number of Grams per Day of Fish Consumed by All Adult Respondents (Consumers and Non-
consumers Combined) - Throughout the Year 10-37
Table 10-41. Fish Intake Throughout the Year by Sex, Age, and Location by All
Adult Respondents 10-38
Table 10-42. Children's Fish Consumption Rates - Throughout Year 10-38
Table 10-43. Number of Local Fish Meals Consumed Per Year by Time Period
for all Respondents 10-40
T-.ble 10-44. Mean Number of Local Fish Meals Consumed Per Year by Time
Period for all Respondents and Consumers Only 10-41
Table 10-45. Mean Number of Local Fish Meals Consumed Per Year by Time
Period and Selected Characteristics for all Respondents 10-41
Page
xviii
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 10-46. Sociodemographic Factors and Recent Fish Consumption 10-42
Table 10-47. Percentage of Individuals using Various Cooking Methods at
Specified Frequencies , - 10-45
Table 10-48. Percent Moisture and Fat Content for Selected Species 10-46
Table 10-49. Summary of Fish Intake Studies .'.... 10-54
Table 10-50. Confidence in Fish Intake Recommendations for General Population 10-57
Table 10-51. Confidence in Fish Intake Recommendations for Recreational Marine Anglers . 10-58
Table 10-52. Confidence in Recommendations for Fish Consumption - Recreational Freshwater 10-59
Table 10-53. Confidence in Recommendations for 'Native American Subsistence Fish Consumption . . 10-60
Table 10B-1. Percent of Fish Meals Prepared Using Various Cooking Methods
by Residence Size -..,.. 10B-3
Table 10B-2. Percent of Fish Meals Prepared Using Various Cooking Methods by Age .' 10B-3
Table 10B-3. Percent of Fish Meals Prepared Using Various Cooking Methods
by Ethnicity , 10B-4
Table 10B-4. Percent of Fish Meals Prepared Using Various Cooking Methods by Education 10B-4
Table 10B-5. Percent of Fish Meals Prepared Using Variuos Cooking Methods
by Income 1QB-5
Table 10B-6. Percent of Fish Meals where Fat was Trimmed or Skin was Removed,
by Demographic Variables ; 10B-6
Table 10B-7. Method of Cooking of Most Common Species Kept by Sportfishermen 10B-7
Table 10B-8. Adult Consumption of Fish Parts 10B-7
Table lOC-1. Daily Average Per Capita Estimates of Fish Consumption U.S. Population - Mean Consumption
by Species within Habitat - As Consumed Fish . , 10-C3
Table 11-1. Intake of Total Meats (g/kg-day) '...-. 11-8
Table 11-2. Intake of Total Dairy Products (g/kg-day) H-9
Table 11-3. Intake of Individual Meat and Dairy Products and Mixtures (g/kg-day) 11-10
Table 11-4. Quantity ("as consumed") of Meat, Poultry, and Dairy Products
Consumed per Eating Occasion and the Percentage of Individuals
Using These Foods in 3 Days , : .....11-12
Table 11-5. Mean per Capita Intake Rates for Meat, Poultry, and Dairy Products
(g/kg-day as condumed) Based on All Sex/Age/Demographic
Subgroups 11-13
Table 11-6. Mean Meat Intakes per Individual in a Day by Sex and Age (g/day as consumed) for
1977-1978 H-14
Table 11-7. Mean Meat Intakes per Individual in a Day by Sex and Age (g/day as consumed) for
1987-1988 ........: 11-14
Table 11-8. Mean Dairy Product Intakes per Individual in a Day, by Sex and Age
(g/day as consumed) for 1977-1978 . . . 11-15
Table 11-9. Mean Dairy Product Intakes per Individual in a Day, by Sex and Age
(g/day as consumed) for 1987-1988 11-15
Table 11-10. Mean and Standard Error for the Dietary Intake of Food Sub Classes
per Capita by Age (grams/day "as consumed") 11-16
Table 11-11. Mean and Standard Error for the Daily Intake of Food Class and
Sub Class by Region (grams/day "as consumed") 11-16
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
xix
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Table 11-12. Consumption of Meat, Poultry, and Dairy Products for Different Age
Groups (averaged across sex), and Estimated Lifetime Average Intakes
for 70 Kg Adult Citizens Calculated from the FDA Diet Data .' 11-17
Table 11-13. Per Capita Consumption of Meat and Poultry in 1991 11-17
Table 11-14. Per Capita Consumption for Dairy Products in 1991 11-18
Table 11-15. Adult Mean Daily Intake (as consumed) of Meat and Poultry Grouped
by Region and Gender 11-19
Table 11-16. Amount (as consumed) of Meat Consumed by Adults Grouped by
Frequency of Eatings ..,..., ,,.,. 11-19
Table 11-17. Percentage Lipid Content (Expressed as Percentages of
100 Grams of Edible Portions) of Selected Meat and Dairy Products 11-20
Table 11-18. Fat Content of Meat Products .--.-. 11-21
Table 11-19. Fat Intake, Contribution of Various Food Groups to Fat Intake, and
Percentage of the Population in Various Meat Eater Groups
of the U.S. Population ,,- H'22
Table 11-20. Mean Total Daily Dietary Fat Intake (g/day) Grouped by Age and
Gender . . n'22
Table 11-21. Percentage Mean Moisture Content (Expressed as Percentages of
100 Grams of Edible Portions) i!'23
Table 11-22. Summary of Meat, Poultry, and Dairy Intake Studies H-24
Table 11-23. Summary of Recommended Values for Intake of Meat and
Dairy Products and Serving Size H'25
Table 11-24. Confidence in Meats and Dairy Products Intake Recommendation 11-26
Table 11-25. Confidence in Meat and Dairy Serving Size Recommendations H-27
Table 12-1. 1986 Vegetable Gardening by Demographic Factors 12~1
Table 12-2. Percentage of Gardening Households Growing Different
Vegetables in 1986 12-!
Table 12-3. Sub-category Codes and Definitions 12~4
Table 12-4, Weighted and Unweighted Number of Observations for NFCS Data
Used in Analysis of Food Intake . . .'. 12"6
Table 12-5. Percent Weight Losses from Preparation of Various Meats 12-7
Table 12-6, Percent Weight Losses from Preparation of Various Fruits I2'7
Table 12-7 Percent Weight Losses from Preparation of Various Vegetables 12-8
Table 12-8. Intake of Homegrown Fruits (g/kg-day) - All Regions Combined 12-11
Table 12-9. Intake of Homegrown Fruits (g/kg-day) - Northeast I2'12
Table 12-10. Intake of Homegrown Fruits (g/kg-day) - Midwest 12-1-
Table 12-11. Intake of Homegrown Fruits (g/kg-day) - South 12-13
Table 12-12. Intake of Homegrown Fruits (g/kg-day) - West 12-14
Table 12-13. Intake of Homegrown Vegetables (g/kg-day) - All Regions Combined 12-15
Table 12-14. Intake of Homegrown Vegetables (g/kg-day) - Northeast 12-16
Table 12-15. Intake of Homegrown Vegetables (g/kg-day) - Midwest 12-17
Table 12-16. Intake of Homegrown Vegetables (g/kg-day) - South 12-1ฐ
Table 12-17. Intake of Homegrown Vegetables (g/kg-day) - West 12-19
Table 12-18. Intake of Home Produced Meats (g/kg-day) - All Regions Combined 12-20
Table 12-19. Intake of Home Produced Meats, (g/kg-day) - Northeast - I-'21
Page
xx
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 12-20. Intake of Home Produced Meats (g/kg.-day) - Midwest 12-22
Table 12-21. Intake of Home Produced Meats (g/kg-day) : South . . , 12-23
Table 12-22. Intake of Home Produced Meats (g/kg-day) - West . 12-24
Table 12-23. Intake of Home Caught Fish (g/kg-day) - All Regions Combined 12-25
Table 12-24. Intake of Home Caught Fish (g/kg-day) - Northeast 12-26
Table 12-25. Intake of Home Caught Fish (g/kg-day) - Midwest . 12-27
Table 12-26. Intake of Home Caught Fish (g/kg-day) - South . 12-28
Table 12-27. Intake of Home Caught Fish (g/kg-day) - West 12-29
Table 12-28. Intake of Home Produced Dairy (g/kg~day) - All Regions Combined . . . '. : 12-30
Table 12-29. Intake of Home Produced Dairy (g/kg-day) - Northeast : . . 12-31
Table 12-30. Intake of Home Produced Dairy (g/kg-day) - Midwest 12-32
Table 12-31. ' Intake of Home Produced Dairy (g/kg-day) -South 12-33
Table 12-32. Intake of Home Produced Dairy (g/kg-day) - West; : . 12-34
Table 12-33. Seasonally Adjusted Homegrown Intake (g/kgTday) . 12-35
Table 12-34. Intake of Homegrown Apples (g/kg-day) 12-36
Table 12-35. Intake of Homegrown Asparagus (g/kg-day) . 12-37
Table 12-36. Intake of Home Produced Beef (g/kg-day) 12-38
Table 12-37. Intake of Homegrown Beets (g/kg-day) . . . 12-39
Table 12-38. Intake of Homegrown Broccoli (g/kg-day) 12-40
Table 12-39. Intake of Homegrown Cabbage (g/kg-day) 12-41
Table 12-40. Intake of Homegrown Carrots (g/kg-day) 12-42
Table 12-41. Intake of Homegrown Corn (g/kg-day) 12-43
Table 12-42. Intake of Homegrown Cucumber (g/kg-day) .- 12-44
Table 12-43. Intake of Home Produced Eggs (g/kg-day) 12-45
Table 12-44. Intake of Home Produced Game (g/kg-day) . . 12-46
Table 12-45. Intake of Homegrown Lettuce (g/kg-day) , 12-47
Table 12-46. Intake of Homegrown Lima Beans (g/kg-day) 12-48
Table 12-47. Intake of Homegrown Okra (g/kg-day) 12-49
Table 12-48. Intake of Homegrown Onions' (g/kg-day) 12-50
Table 12-49. Intake of Homegrown Other Berries (g/kg-day) 12-51
Table 12-50. Intake of Homegrown Peaches (g/kg-day) 12-52
Table 12-51. Intake of Homegrown Pears (g/kg-day) 12-53
Table 12-52. Intake of Homegrown Peas (g/kg-day) 12-54
Table 12-53. Intake of Homegrown Peppers (g/kg-day) 12-55
Table 12-54. Intake of Home Produced Pork (g/kg-day) 12-56
Table 12-55. Intake of Home Produced Poultry (g/kg-day) 12-57
Table 12-56. . Intake of Homegrown Pumpkin (g/kg-day) 12-58
Table 12-57. Intake of Homegrown Snap Beans (g/kg-day) 12-59
Table 12-58. Intake of Homegrown Strawberries (g/kg-day) 12-60
Table 12-59. Intake of Homegrown Tomatoes (g/kg-day) 12-61
Table 12-60. Intake of Homegrown White Potatoes (g/kg-day) 12-62
Table 12-61. Intake of Homegrown Exposed Fruit (g/kg-day) . . 12-63
Table 12-62. Intake of Homegrown Protected Fruits (g/kg-day) . . . '. 12-64
Table 12-63. Intake of Homegrown Exposed Vegetables (g/kg-day) . . ., 12-65
Table 12-64. Intake of Homegrown Protected Vegetables (g/kg-day) 12-66
Table 12-65. Intake of Homegrown Root Vegetables (g/kg-day) 12-67
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
xxi
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Table 12-66. Intake of Homegrown Dark Green Vegetables (g/kg-day) 1--68
Table 12-67. Intake of Homegrown Deep Yellow Vegetables (g/kg-day) |--w
Table 12-68. Intake of Homegrown Other Vegetables (g/kg-day) |--/<'
Table 12-69. Intake of Homegrown Citrus (g/kg-day) J-'^
Table 12-70. Intake of Homegrown Other Fruit (g/kg-day) , J-"'-
Table 12-71. Fraction of Food Intake that is Home Produced |--"
Table 12-72. Confidence in Homegrown Food Consumption Recommendations l--"
Table 13-1. Daily Intakes of Breast Milk , ~~
Table 13-2. Breast Milk Intake Among Exclusively Breast-fed Infants ^
During the First 4 Months of Life |^~"
Table 13-3. Breast Milk Intake During a 24-Hour Period . ^
Table 13-4. Breast Milk Intake for Infants Aged 1 to 6 Months . : l^
Table 13-5. Breast Milk Intake Estimated by the DARLING Study |^
Table 13-6. Milk Intake for Bottle- and Breast-fed Infants by Age Group |>*
Table 13-7. Milk Intake for Boys and Girls : ; j;f
Table 13-8. Intake of Breast Milk and Formula
Table 13-9. Lipid Content of Human Milk and Estimated Lipid Intake
Among Exclusively Breast-fed Infants ^
Table 13-10. Predicted Lipid Intakes for Breast-fed Infants Under 12 Months of Age j>ฐ
Table 13-11. Total Energy Intake "
Table 13-12. Energy Intake from Human Milk -, 13 8
Table 13-13. Number of Meals Per Day - -...- .-:
Table 13-14. Percentage of Mothers Breast-feeding Newborn Infants in the Hospital
and Infants at 5 or 6 Months of Age in the United States in 1989,
by Ethnic Background and Selected Demographic Variables . 1 J-v
Table 13-15. Breast Milk Intake Studies ,- ..,,.,...- - -
Table 13-16. Confidence in Breast Milk Intake Recommendations "-^
Table 13-17. Breast Milk Intake Rates Derived From Key Studies j^
Table 13-18. Summary of Recommended Breast Milk and Lipid Intake Rates l-*'10
Table 14-1. Time Use Table Locator Guide
Table 14-2. Mean Time Spent (Minutes) Performing Major Activities Grouped
by Age, Sex and Type of Day
Table 14-3. Mean Time Spent in Major Activities Grouped by Type of Day
for Five Different Age Groups
Table 14-4 Mean Time Spent in 10 Major Activity Cateogries Grouped
by Total Sample and Gender for the CARB and National Studies
(Age 18-64) ' : ' l
Table 14-5 Total Mean Time Spent at 3 Major Locations Grouped by Total
Sample and Gender for the CARB and National Study (Ages 18-64) w-*i
Table 14-6. Mean Time Spent at Three Locations for both CARB and National
Studies (Ages 12 and Older) 1*~~
Table 14-7. Mean Time Spent (mins/day) in Various Microenvironments
Grouped by Total Populationand Gender (12 years and over)
in the National and CARB Data
Page
xxii
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Table 14-8. Mean Time Spent (rains/day) in Various Microenvironments by
Type of Day (Sample Population Ages 12'and Older) 14-23
Table 14-9. Mean Time Spent (rnins/day) in Various Microenvironments
by Age Groups . . .' 14-24
Table 14-10. Mean Time Children Spent in 10 Major Activity Categories
for all Respondents 14'25
Table 14-11. Mean Time Children Spent in 10 Major Activity Categories Grouped
by Age and Gender 14-?-5
Table 14-12. Mean Time Children Spent in 10 MajofActivity Categories Grouped
by Seasons and Regions 14-26
Table 14-13. Mean Time Children Spent in Six Major Location Categories for
All Respondents ' , 14'-6
Table 14-14. Mean Time Children Spent in Six Location Categories
Grouped by Age and Gender 14-27
Table 14-15.. Mean Time Children Spent in Six Location Categories Grouped by
Season and Region : . . '., . . . 14-27
Table 14-16. Mean Time Children Spent in Proximity to Three Potential Exposures
Grouped by AH Respondents, Age, and Gender - 14-28
Table 14-17. Range of Recommended Defaults for Dermal Exposure Factors 14-28
Table 14-18. " Cumulative Frequency Distribution of Average Shower Duration
for 2,500 Households - 14'29
Table 14-19. Frequency of Taking a Shower in One Day 14-30
Table 14-20. Range of the Number of Minutes Spent in the Shower After Showering , 14-31
Table 14-21. Distribution for the Number of Minutes Spent in the Shower After Showering 14-32
Table 14-22. Frequency of Taking or Giving a Bath in a Day . 14-33
Table 14-23. Range of the Minutes Spent Taking or Giving a Bath 14-34
Table 14-24. Distribution for the Number of Minutes Spent Giving and Taking a Bath 14-35
Table 14-25. Range of the Number of Minutes Spent in the Bathroom Immediately
, After a Bath .- 14-36
Table 14-26. , Distribution for the Number of Minutes Spent in the Bathroom
Immediately After a Bath 14-37
Table 14-27. Range of the Total Number of Minutes Altogether Spent in the
Shower or Bathtub 14"38
Table 14-28. Distribution for the Total Number of Minutes Spent in the Shower
or Bathtub 14'39
Table 14-29. Range of Number of Minutes Spent in the Bathroom Immediately
Following a Shower or Bath - - 14-40
Table 14-30. Distribution for the Number of Minutes Spent in the Bathroom
Immediately Following a Shower or Bath 14-41
Table 14-31. Frequency of Washing the Hands in a Day 14-42
Table 14-32. Distribution for Number of Minutes Working or Being Near Food
While Fired, Grilled, or Barbequed 14-43
Tjble 14-33. Distribution for the Number of Minutes Working or Being Near
Open Flames Including Barbeque Flames 14-44
Table 14-34. Distribution for the Number of Times Working or Being Near
Excessive Dust in the Air 14'45
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
xxiii
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Table 14-35. Range of the Number of Times An Automobile or Motor Vehicle Was Started 14-46
Table 14-36 Range of the Number of Times a Motor Vehicle Was Started with the Garage Door
Closed 14-47
Table 14-37. Distribution for the Number of Minutes Spent at a Gas Station or
Auto Repair Shop .,....,., 14-48
Table 14-38. Distribution for the Number of Minutes Spent While Windows Were Left Open While
at Home .....=r 14'49
Table 14-39. Distribution for the Number of Minutes the Outside Door was Left
Open While at Home 14'50
Table 14-40. Frequency of Opening an Outside Door in the Home in a Day - 14-51
Table 14-41. Distribution for the Number of Minutes Spent Running, Walking, or Standing Alongside
a Road with Heavy Traffic 14-52
Table 14-42. Distribution for the Number of Minutes Spent in a Car, Van, Truck,
or Bus in Heavy Traffic 14-53
Table 14-43. Distribution for the Number of Minutes Spent in a Parking Garage or
Indoor Parking Lot . . . ., , . . ..,..., , , , = , =..*., , -. -.....-.: 14:5.4
Table 14-44. Distribution for the Number of Minutes Spent Walking Outside to a Car
in the Driveway or Outside Parking Areas 14-55
Table 14-45. Distribution for the Number of Minutes Spent running or Walking
Outside 14-56
Table 14-46. Distribution for the Number of Minutes Spent Working for Pay 14-57
Table 14-47. Distribution for the Number of Minutes Spent Working for Pay
Between 6PM and 6AM 14'58
Table 14-48. Distribution for Number of Minutes Worked Outdoors !4-59
Table 14-49. Frequency of Sweeping or Vacuuming Floors 14'60
Table 14-50. The Number of Days Since the Floor Area Was Swept or Vacuumed 14-61
Table 14-51. Number of Separate Loads of Laundry Washed at Home 14-62
Table 14-52. Frequency of Using a Dishwasher 14'63
Table 14-53. Frequency of Washing Dishes by Hand I4'64
Table 14-54. Frequency of Washing Clothes in a Washing Machine 14-65
Table 14-55. Range of Number of Minutes Spent Playing on Sand or Gravel . , 14-66
Table 14-56 Distribution for the Number of Minutes Spent Playing in Sand or Gravel 14-67
Table 14-57 Range of Number of Minutes Spent Playing in Outdoors 14-68
Table 14-58. Distribution for the Number of Minutes Spent Playing in Dirt .' 14-69
Table 14-59. Range of the Minutes Spent Working in a Garden or Other
Circumstances Working widi Soil 14-70
Table 14-60. Distribution for the Number of Minutes Spent Working in a Garden
or Other Circumstances Working with Soil 14-71
Table 14-61. Range of Number of Minutes Spent Playing on Grass 14-72
Table 14-62. Distribution for the Number of Minutes Spent Playing on Grass 14-73
Table 14-63. The Number of Times Swimming in a Month in Freshwater Swimming Pool
Table 14-64. .Average Amount of Time Actually Spent in the Water by Swimmers 14-74
Table 14-65. The Number of Times Swimming in a Month in Freshwater Swimming Pool
Table 14-66. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes in a Main Job 14-76
Table 14-67. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in
Food Preparation .' 14~77
Page
xxiv
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
EFH
Table 14-68.
Table 14-69.
Table 14-70.
Table 14-71.
Table 14-72.
Table 14-73.
Table 14-74.
Table 14-75.
Table 14-76.
Table 14-77.
Table 14-78.
Table 14-79.
Table 14-80.
Table 14-81. '
Table 14-82.
Table 14-83.
Table 14-84.
Table 14-85.
Table 14-86.
Table 14-87.
Table 14-88.
Table 14-89.
Table 14-90.
Table 14-91. '
Table 14-92.
Table 14-93.
Table 14-94.
Table 14-95.
Table 14-96.
Table 14-97.
Table 14-98.
Table 14-99,
Table 14-100.
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in
Food Cleanup 14-'78
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Cleaning House
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Outdoor Cleaning 14-79
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in
Clothes Care 14-80
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Car Repair/ Maintenance . 14-81
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Other Repairs 14-82
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Plant Care 14-83
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in
Animal Care 14"84
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Other Household Work . 14-85
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Indoor Playing 14-86
Statistics for 24- Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Outdoor Playing 14-87
Statistics for 24- Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent for Car Repair Services . . . 14-88
Statistics for .24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent
Washing, Etc 14'89
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Sleeping/Napping 14-90
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Attending Full time School . 14-91
Statistics for 24- Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Active Sports 14-92
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Outdoor Recreation .... 14-93
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Exercise
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Food Preparation : 14-94
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Doing Dishes/Laundry . . . 14-95
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Housekeeping 14-96
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Bathing 14-97
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Yardwork/Maintenance . 14-98
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Sports/Exercise
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Eating or Drinking 14-99
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors at Auto Repair
Shop/Gas Station . ,..'. 14-100
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors at a gym/Health
Club 14-101
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors at the Laundromat 14-102
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors at Work
(Non-Specific) . . . 14-103
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors
at the Dry Cleaners 14-104
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors
at a Bar/Nightclub/Bowling Alley 14-105
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors
at a Restaurant ; . . -. 14-106
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors
at School 14-107
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1996 xxv
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Table 14-101. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors
at a Plant/Factory/Warehouse 14-108
Table 14-102. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors
on a Sidewalk, Street, or in the Neighborhood , 14-109
Table 14-103. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors
in a Parking Lot 14-!10
Table 14-104. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors
at a Service Station or Gas Station 14-111
Table 14-105. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors
at a Construction Site , .. , = = . ... .; . ,- ~ : 14-1JJ
Table 14-106. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors
on School Grounds/Playground ! 14-113
Table 14-107. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors
at a Park/Golf Course .-.. 14'114
Table 14-108. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors
at a Pool/River/Lake 14'115
Table 14-109. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors
at a Restaurant/Picnic 14-116
Table 14-110. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors
at a Farm - . - 14-U7
Table 14-111. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent at Home
indie Kitchen - 14'118
Table 14-112. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in
the Bathroom
Table 14-113. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent at Home
in the Bedroom - - ... 14-119
Table 14-114. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent at Home
in the Garage ,. 14'120
Table 14-115. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in the
Basement 14-121
Table 14-116. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent at Home
in the Utility Room or Laundry Room 14-122
Table 14-117. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent at Home
in the Outdoor Pool or Spa 14-123
Table 14-118. Statistics for'24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent at Home
in the Yard or Other Areas Outside the House 14-124
Table 14-119. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Traveling
inaCar I4'125
Table 14-120. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Traveling
in a Truck (Pick-up/Van) 14'126
Table 14-121. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Traveling
on a Motorcycle, Moped, or Scooter : . . . . 14-127
Table 14-122. Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Traveling
in Other Trucks t 14'128
Table 14-123 Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Traveling
onaBus 14'129
Page
xxvi
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
_
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 14-124.
Table 14-125.
Table 14-126.
Table 14-127.
Table 14-128.
Table 14-129.
Table 14-130.
Table 14-131.
Table-14-132.
Table 14-133.
Table 14-134.
Table 14-135.
Table 14-136.
Table 14-137.
table 14-138!
Table 14-139.
Table 14-140.
Table 14-141.
Table 14-142.
Table 14-143.
Table 14-144.
Table 14-145.
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Walking
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Traveling
on a Bicycle/Skate Hoard/Roller Skate
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Waiting
at a Bus, Train, etc. Stop :
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Traveling
on a Train/Subway/Rapid Transit ,
Statistics for 24.Hpur Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Traveling
on an Airplane '
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Indoors
in a Residence (All Rooms)
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors
(Outside the Residence) .
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Traveling Inside a
Vehicle
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors
Near a Vehicle
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent Outdoors
Other Than Near a Residence or Vehicle Such as Parks, golf Courses,
or Farms
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in an Office
or Factory . . . .,
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Malls, Grocery Stores,
or Other Stores ,.
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Schools, Churches,
Hospitals, and Public Buildings
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Bars/Nightclubs,
Bowling Alleys, and Restaurants -
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent in Other Outdoors Such as
Auto Repair Shops, Laundromats, Gyms, and
at Work (Non-specific)
Statistics for 24-Hour Cumulative Number of Minutes Spent With
Smokers Present
Differences in Time Use (hours/week Grouped by Sex, Employment
Status, and Marital Status for the Surveys Conducted in 1965
and 1975
Time Use (hours/week) Differences by Age for the Surveys Conducted
in 1965 and 1975
Time Use (hours/week) Differences by Education for the Surveys
Conducted in 1965 and 1975 -
Time Use (hours/week) Differences by Race for the Surveys
Conducted in 1965 and 1975
Mean Time Spent (hours/week) in 10 Major Activity Categories
Grouped by Regions
Total Mean Time Spent (mins/day) in Ten Major Activity
Categories Grouped by Type of Day . . . .
14-130
14-131
14-132
14-133
14-134
14-135
14-136
14-1.37
14-138
14-139
14-140
14-141
14-142
14-143
14-144
14-145
14-152
14-153
14-154
14-155
14-155
14-156
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
xxvii
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 14-146. Mean Time Spent (mins/day) in 10 Major Activity Categories
During Four Waves of Interviews 14-156
Table 1-1-147, Mean Time Spent (hours/week) in 10 Major Activity Categories
Grouped by Gender 14-157
Table 14-148. Percent Respoases of Children's "Play" (activities) Locations
in Maryvale, Arizona .' ,,, , ,- ...., < 14.-J5J
Table 14-149. Occupational Tenure of Employed Individuals by Age and Sex 14-158
Table 14-150. Occupational Tenure for Employed Individuals Grouped
by Sex and Race 14-158
Table 14-151. Occupational Tenure for Employed Individuals Grouped by Sex
and Employment Status :...... , 14-159
Table 14-152. Occupational Tenure of Employed Individuals Grouped by
Major Occupational Groups and Age 14-159
Table 14-153. Voluntary Occupational Mobility Rates for Workers Age 16
and Older ... ., 14-160
Table 14-154. Values and Their Standard Errors for Average Total Residence
Time, T, for Each Group in Survey 14-160
Table 14-155. Total Residence Time, t (years), Corresponding to Selected Values
of R(t) by Housing Category 14-161
Table 14-156. Residence Time of Owner/Renter Occupied Units '. .' 14-161
Table 14-157. Percent of Householders Living in Houses for Specified
Ranges of Time :..... 14-162
Table 14-158. Descriptive Statistics for Residential Occupancy Period 14-162
Table 14-159. Descriptive Statistics for Both Genders by Current Age 14-163
Table 14-160. Summary of Residence Time of Recent Home Buyers 14-163
Table 14-161. Tenure in Previous Home (Percentage Distribution) 14-164
Table 14-162, Number of Miles Moved (Percentage Distribution) 14-164
Table 14-163. Confidence in Activity Patterns Recommendations 14-165
Table 14-164. Confidence in Occupational Mobility Recommendations 14-172
Table 14-165. Confidence in Population Mobility Recommendations . . 14-173
Table 14-166. Summary of Recommended Values for Activity Factors 14-174
Table 14A-1. Differences in Average Time Spent in Different Activities Between
California and National Studies (Minutes Per Day for Age 18-64) . : 14A-1
Table 14A-2. Time Spent in Various Micro-environments 14A-3
Table 14A-3. Activity Codes and Descriptors Used For Adult Time Diaries ' 14A-5
Table 14A-4. Major Time Use Activity Categories 14A-19
Table 14A-5. Mean Time Spent (mins/day) for 87 Activities Grouped by Day
of the Week 14A-20
Table 14A-6. Weighted Mean Hours Per Week by Gender: 87 Activities arid
10 Subtotals 14A-23
Table 14A-7. Ranking of Occupations by Median Years of Occupational
Tenure 14A-26
T .ble 14B-1. Annual Geographical Mobility Rates, by Type of Movement
for Selected 1-Year Periods: 1960-1992
(Numbers in Thousands) 14B'l
Page
xxviii
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 14B-2. Mobility of the Resident Population by State: 1980 14B-2
Table 15-1. Consumer Products Found in the Typical U.-S. Household : 15-7
Table 15-2. Frequency of Use For Household Solvent Products 15-10
Table 15-3. Exposure Time of Use For Household Solvent Products 15-11
Table 15-4. Amount of Products Used For Household Solvent Products 15-12
Table 15-5. Time Exposed After Duration of Use For Household
Solvent Products . : : 15-13
Table 15-6. Frequency of Use and Amount of Product Used for
Adhesive Removers : 15-14
Table 15-7. Adhesive Remover Usage by Gender 15-14
Table 15-8. Frequency of Use and Amount of Product Used for
Spray Paint . . . . 15-15
Table 15-9. Spray Paint Usage by Gender 15-15
Table 15-10. Frequency of Use and Amount of Product Used for
Paint Removers/Strippers 13-16
Table 15-11. Paint Stripper Usage by Gender . . : 13-16
Table 15-12. Total Exposure Time of Performing Task and Product
Type Used by Task For Household Cleaning Products 13-17
Table 15-13. Percentile Rankings for Total Exposure Time in
Performing Household Tasks . . ' 15-!9
Table 15-14. Mean Percentile Rankings for Frequency of Performing
Household Tasks 13-20
Table 15-15. Mean and Percentile Rankings for Exposure Time Per
Event of Performing Household Tasks . 15-21
Table 15-16. Total Exposure Time for Ten Product Groups Most
Frequently Used For Household Cleaning , 15-21
Table 15-17. Total Exposure Time of Painting Activity of
Interior Painters (hrs) 15-22
Table 15-18. Exposure Time of Interior Painting Activity/Occasion (hrs)
and Frequency of Occasions Spent Painting Per Year - - 15-22
Table 15-19. Amount of Paint Used by Interior Painters 15-22
Table 15-20. Number of Cans or Bottles of Carbonate Soft Drink Consumed
by the Respondent 15-23
Table 15-21. Frequency of Cologne, Perfume, Aftershave or Other Fragrances
Used in One Day , 13'24
Table 15-22. Frequency of Use of Any Aerosol Spray Product for Personal Care
Such as Deodorant or Hair Spray 15-25
Table 15-23. Number of Minutes Spent in Activities Working With or Being Near
Freshly Applied Paints 15'26
Table ,15-24. Number of Minutes Spent in Activities Working With or Near Household Cleaning
Agents Such as Scouring Powders or Ammonia 15-27
Table 15-25. Number of Minutes Spent in Activities (At Home or Elsewhere)
Working With or Near Floorwax, Furniture Wax or Shoe Polish . . 15-28
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
xxix
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Table 15-26. Number of Minutes Spent in Activities Working With or Being
NearGlue .,. ,., - 15-29
Table 15-27. Number of Minutes Spent in Activitees Working with or Near Solvents, Fumes or Strong
Smelling Chemicals : 15-30
Table 15-28. Number of Minutes Spent in Activities Working With or Near Spot Removers 15-31
Table 15-29. Number of Minutes Spent in Activites Working With or Near Gasoline
or Diesel-Powered Equipment, Besides Automobiles 15-32
Table 15-30. Number of Minutes Spent Using Any Microwave Oven . 15"33
Table 15-31. Frequency of Use of Humidifier at Home 15-34
Table 15-32. Number of Times Pesticides Were Applied by the Professional at Home
to Eradicate Insects, Rodents, or Other Pests . . 15-35
Table 15-33. Number of Times Pesticides Were Applied by the Consumer at Home
to Eradicate Insects, Rodents, or Other Pests . , 15-36
Table 15-34. Number of Minutes Spent in Activities Working With or Near
Pesticides, Including Bug Sprays or Bug Strips . . 15-37
Table 15-35. Range of Number of Minutes Spent Smoking Cigars or Pipe Tobacco By the Number of
Respondents 15"38
Table 15-36. Number of Minutes Spent Smoking Cigars or Pipe Tobacco 15-39
Table 15-37. Range of Numbers of Cigarettes Smoked Based on the Number of Respondents 15-40
Table 15-38. Range of the Number of Cigarettes Smoked While at Home 15-41
Table 15-39. Number of Cigarettes Smoked by Other People 15-42
Table 15-40. Number of Minutes Spent Smoking ' 15-43
Table 15-41. Range of Time (Minutes) Spent Smoking 15-44
Table 15-42. Amount and Frequency of Use of Various Cosmetic and
Baby Products , -. ,.-,... 15'46 ,
Table 15-43. Summary of Consumer Products Use Studies 15-49
Table 15A-1. Volumes Included in 1992 Simmons Study 15A-3
Table 16-1. Summary of Residential Volume Distributions in Cubic Meters 16-2
Table 16-2. Average Estimated .Volumes of U.S. Residences, by Housing Type and Ownership 16-3
Table 16-3. Residential Volumes in Relation to Household Size and Year of
Construction ^'3
Table 16-4. Dimensional Quantities for Residential Rooms !6-5
Table 16-5. Examples of Products and Materials Associated with Floor and
Wall Surfaces in Residences : 16-6
Table 16-6. Percent of Residences with Certain Foundation Types 16-8
Table 16-7. Percent of Residences with Basement, by EPA Region 16-8
Table 16-8. Summary of Major Projects Providing Air Exchange Measurements
in the PFT Database 1(*-11
Table 16-9. Summary of Statistics for Air Exchange Rates (Air Changes Per
Hour-ACH), by Region 16-12
Table 16-10. Regional and Seasonal Distributions for Residential Air Exchange
Rates 16'12
Table 16-11. Deposition Rates for Indoor Particles 16-14
Table 16-12. Particle Deposition During Indoor Activities 16-15
Table 16-13. In-house Water Use Rates (gcd), by Study and Type of Use 16-18
Page
XXX
Exposure Factors Handbook
____ August 1996
-------
EFH
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 16-14. Summary of Water Use, l6'19
Table 16-15. Showering and Bathing Water Use Characteristics : 16-19
Table 16-16. Showering Characteristics for Various Types of Shower Heads - 16-19
Table 16-17. Toilet Water Use Characteristics 16-19
Table 16-18. Toilet Frequency Use Characteristics , 16-20
Table 16-19. Dishwasher Frequency Use Characteristics . 16-20
Table 16-20. Dishwasher Water Use Characteristics . . . 16-20
Table 16-21. Clothes Washer Frequency Use Characteristics '- 16-20
Table 16-22. Clothes Washer Water Use Characteristics - 16-20
Table 16-23. ; Range of Water Uses for Clothes Washers 16-20
Table 16-24. Panicle Deposition and Resuspeasion During Normal Activities 16-21
Table 16-25. Dust Mass Loading After One Week Without Vacuum Cleaning 16-21
Table 16-26. Totalized Dust Loading for Carpeted Areas 16-21
Table 16-27. Simplified Source Descriptions for Airborne Contaminants - 16-22
Table 16-28. , Volume of Residence Surveys 16-30
Table 16-29. Air Exchange Rates Surveys - ' : 16-31
Table 16-30. Confidence in House Volume Recommendation . - 16-32
Table 16-31. Confidence in Air Exchange Rates Recommendation .......: 16-33
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
xxxi
-------
EFH
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1-1. Road Map to Exposure Factor Recommendations 1-15
Figure 6-1. SA/BW Distributions for Infants, Adults, and All Ages Combined 6-18
Figure 6-2. Surface Area Frequency Distribution: Men and Women 6-19
Figure 10-1. Seasonal Fish Consumption: Wisconsin Chippewa, 1990 10-43
Figure 10-2. Peak Fish Consumption: Wisconsin Chippewa, 1990 10-43
Figure 14-1. Distribution of Individuals Moving by Type of Move: 1991-92 14-12
Figure 16-1. Elements of Residential Exposure . 16-1
Figure 16-2. Cumulative Frequency Distributions for Residential Volumes 16-4
Figure 16-3. Configurations for Residential Forced-air1 Systems 16-6
Figure 16-4. EPA Regions and Census, Regions ,,. ........................ .., 16-9...
Figure 16-5. Idealized Patterns of Particle Deposition Indoors 16-14
Figure 16-6. Air Flows for Multiple-zone Systems 16-15
Figure 16-7. Characteristic Volumes and Airflow Rates for Two-zone Situations 16-17
Page
xxxii
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
9. INTAKE OF FRUITS AND VEGETABLES
9.1. BACKGROUND
Ingestion of contaminated fruits and vegetables is a
potential pathway of human exposure to toxic chemicals.
Fruits and vegetables may become contaminated with toxic
chemicals by several different pathways. Ambient
pollutants from the air may be deposited on or absorbed by
the plants, or dissolved in rainfall or irrigation waters that
contact the plants. Pollutants may also be absorbed through
plant roots from contaminated soil and ground water. The
addition of pesticides, soil additives, and fertilizers may also
result in food contamination.
The primary source of information on consumption
rates of fruits and vegetables among the United States
population is the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USD A)
Nationwide Food Consumption Survey (NFCS) and the
USD A Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals
(CSFII). Data from the NFCS have been used in various
studies to generate consumer-only and per capita intake
rates for both individual fruits and vegetables and total fruits
and total vegetables. CSFD data from the 1989-1991
survey have been analyzed by EPA to generate per capita
intake rates for various food items and food groups.
Consumer-only intake is defined as the quantity of
fruits and vegetables consumed by individuals who ate these
food items during the survey period. Per capita intake rates
are generated by averaging consumer-only intakes over the
entire population of users and non-users. In general, per
capita intake rates are appropriate for use in exposure
assessment for which average dose estimates for the general
population are of interest because they represent both
individuals who ate the foods during the survey period and
individuals who may eat the food items at some time, but
did not consume them during the survey period. Total fruit
intake refers to the sum of all fruits consumed in a day
including canned, dried, frozen, and fresh fruits. Likewise,
total vegetable intake refers to the sum of all vegetables
consumed in a day including canned, dried, frozen, and
fresh vegetables. For the purposes of this Handbook, the
distinctions between fruits and Vegetables are those
commonly used, not the botanical definitions. For example,
in this report, tomatoes are considered vegetables, although
technically they are fruits.
Intake rates may be presented on either an as
consumed or dry weight basis. As consumed intake rates
(g/day) are based on the weight of the food in the form that
it is consumed. In contrast, dry weight intake rates arc
based on the weight of the food consumed after the moisture
content has been removed. In calculating exposures based
on ingestion, the unit of weight used to measure intake
should be consistent with those used in measuring the
contaminant concentration in the produce. Intake data from
the individual component of the NFCS and CSFII are based
on "as eaten" (i.e., cooked or prepared) forms of the food
items/groups. Thus, corrections to account for changes in
portion sizes from cooking losses are not required.
Estimating source-specific exposures to toxic
chemicals in fruits and vegetables may also require
information on the amount of fruits and vegetables that are
-exposed to or protected from contamination as a result of
cultivation practices or the physical nature of the food
product itself (i.e., those having protective coverings that
are removed before eating would be considered protected),
or the amount grown beneath the soil (i.e., most root crops
such as potatoes). The percentages of foods grown above
and below ground will be useful when the concentrations of
contaminants in foods are estimated from concentrations in
soil, water, and air. For example, vegetables grown below
ground may be more likely to be contaminated by soil
pollutants, but leafy above ground vegetables may be more
likely to be contaminated by deposition of air pollutants on
plant surfaces.
The purpose of this section is to provide: (1) intake
data for individual fruits and vegetables, and total fruits and
total vegetables; (2) guidance for converting between as
consumed and dry weight intake rates; and (3) intake data
for exposed and protected fruits and vegetables and those
grown below ground. Recommendations are based on
average and upper-percentile intake among the general
population of the U.S. Available data have been classified
as being either a key or a relevant study based on the
considerations discussed in Volume I, Section 1.3.1 of the
Introduction. Recommendations are based on data from the
CSFH 1989-1991 survey, which was considered the only
key intake study for fruits and vegetables. Although Pao et
al. (1982) was not considered a key study for intake of fruits
and vegetables because it is based on data from NFCS
1977-1978, it was included as a key study for serving size.
Other relevant studies are also presented to provide the
reader with added perspective on this topic. It should be
noted that many of the relevant studies are based on data
from USDA's NFCS and CSFH. The USDA NFCS and
CSFII are described below.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
9-1
-------
Volume 11 - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
9.2. INTAKE STUDIES
9.2.1. U.S. Department of Agriculture Nationwide
Food Consumption Survey and Continuing
Survey of Food Intake by Individuals
USDA conducts the NFCS approximately every 10
years. The three most recent NFCSs were conducted in
1965-66, 1977-78, and 1987-88. The purpose of these
surveys was to "analyze the food consumption behavior and
dietary status of Americans" (USDA, 1992a). The survey
uses a statistical sampling technique designed to ensure that
all seasons, geographic regions of the U.S., and
demographic and socioeconomic groups are represented.
There are two components of the NFCS. The household
component collects information on the socioeconomic and
demographic characteristics of households, and the types,
value, and sources of foods consumed over a 7-day period.
The individual component collects information on food
intakes of individuals within each household over a 3-day
period (USDA, 1992b).
The same basic survey design was used for the three
most recent NFCSs, but the sample sizes and statistical
classifications used were somewhat different (USDA,
1992a). In 1965-66, 10,000 households were surveyed
(USDA, 1972). The sample size increased to 15,000
households (over 36,000 individuals) in 1977-78, but
decreased to 4,500 households in 1987-88 because of
budgetary constraints and a low response rate (37 percent).
Data from the 1977-78 NFCS are presented in this
Handbook because the data have been published by USDA
in various publications and reanalyzed by various EPA
offices according to the food items/groups commonly used
to assess exposure. Published one-day data from the 1987-
88 NFCS data are also presented.
USDA also conducted the Continuing Survey of
Food Intake by Individuals during 1989 through 1991
(USDA, 1993a). The purpose of the survey was to "assess
food consumption behavior and nutritional content of diets
for policy implications relating to food production and
marketing, food safety, food assistance, and nutrition
education" (USDA, 1993a). Using a stratified sampling
technique, individuals of all ages living in selected
households in the 48 conterminous states and Washington,
D.C. were surveyed. Individuals provided 3 consecutive
days of data, including a personal interview on the first day
followed by 2-day dietary records. Over 15,000 individuals
participated in the 1989-91 CSFII. The three-day response
rate for the 1989/91 CSFII was approximately 45 percent.
Individual average daily intake rates calculated from
NFCS data are based on averages of reported individual
intakes over one day or three consecutive days. Such short
term data are suitable for estimating mean average daily
intake rates representative of both short-term and long-term
consumption. However, the distribution of average daily
intake rates generated using short term data (e.g., 3 day) do
not necessarily reflect the long-term distribution of average
daily intake rates. The distributions generated from short
term and long term data will differ to the extent that each
individual's intake varies from day to day; the distributions
will be similar to the extent that individuals' intakes are
constant from day to day.
Day to day variation in intake among individuals will be
great for food item/groups that are highly seasonal and for
items/groups that are eaten year around but that are not
typically eaten every day. For these foods, the intake
distribution generated from short term data will not be a
good reflection of the long term distribution. On the other
hand, for broad categories of foods (e.g., vegetables) which
are eaten on a daily basis throughout the year with minimal
seasonality, the short term distribution may be a reasonable
approximation of the true long term distribution, although
it will show somewhat more variability. In this and the
following section, distributions are shown only for the
following broad categories of foods: fruits, vegetables,
meats and dairy. Because of the increased variability of the
short-term distribution, the short-term upper percentiles
shown here will overestimate somewhat the corresponding
percentiles of the long-term distribution.
9.2.2. Key Fruits and Vegetables Intake Study Based
on the USDA CSFII
U.S. EPA Analysis of USDA 1989-1991 CSFII Data
- EPA analyzed three years of data from USDA's CSFII to
generate distributions of intake rates for various fruit and
vegetable items/groups. Data from the 1989, 1990, and
1991 CFSn were combined into a single data set to increase
the number of observations available for analysis.
Approximately 15,000 individuals provided intake data
over the three survey years. The fruit and vegetable
items/groups selected for this analysis included total fruits
and total vegetables; individual fruits such as: apples,
peaches, pears, strawberries, and other berries; individual
vegetables such as: asparagus, beets, broccoli, cabbage,
carrots, corn, cucumbers, lettuce, lima beans, okra, onions,
peas, peppers, pumpkin, snap beans, tomatoes, and white
potatoes; fruits and vegetables categorized as exposed,
protected and roots; and various USDA categories (i.e.,
citrus and other fruits, and dark green, deep' yellow, and
other vegetables). These fruit and vegetable categories
Page
9-2
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
were selected to be consistent with those evaluated in the
homegrown food analysis presented in Chapter 12. Intake
rates of total vegetables, tomatoes, and white potatoes were
adjusted to account for the amount of these food items eaten
as meat and grain mixtures as described in Appendix 9A.
Food items/groups were identified in the CSFU data base
according to USDA-defmed food codes. Appendix 9B
presents the codes used to determine the various food
groups. Intake rates for these food items/groups represent
intake of all forms of the product (i.e., home produced and
commercially produced).
Individual identifiers in the database were used
throughout the analysis to categorize populations according
to demographics. These identifiers included identification
number, region, urbanization, age, sex, race, body weight,
weighting factor, season, and number of days that data were
reported. Distributions of intake were determined for
individuals who provided data for all three days of the
survey. Individuals who did not provide information on
body weight, or for which identifying information was
unavailable, were excluded from the analysis. Three-day
average intake rates were calculated for all individuals in
the database for each of the food items/groups. These
average daily intake rates were divided by each individual's
body weight to generate intake rates in units of g/kg-day.
The data were also weighted according to the three-day
weights provided in the 1991 CSFO. USDA sample
weights are calculated to account for inherent biases in the
sample selection process, and to adjust the sample
population to reflect the national population. Summary
statistics for individual intake rates were generated on a per
capita basis. That is, both users and non-users of the food
item were included in the analysis. Mean consumer only
intake rates may be calculated by dividing the mean per
capita intake rate by the percent of the population
consuming the food item of interest. Summary statistics
included are: number of weighted and unweighted
observations, percentage of the population using the food
item/group being analyzed, mean intake rate, standard error,
and percentiles of the intake rate distribution (i.e., 0, 1,5,
10, 25, 50, 75, 90, 95, 99, and 100th percentile). Data
were provided for the total population using the food item
being evaluated and for several demographic groups
including: various age groups (i.e., <1,1-2,3-5,6-11,12-
19, 20-39, 40-69, and 70+ years); regions (i.e., Midwest,
Northeast, South, and West); urbanizations (i.e., Central
City, Nonmetropolitan, and Suburban; seasons (i.e., winter,
spring, summer, and fall); and races (i.e., White, Black,
Asian, Native American, and other). Table 9-1 provides the
codes, definitions, and a description of the data in these
categories. The total numbers of individuals in the data set,
by demographic group are presented in Table 9-2. The
food analysis was accomplished using the SAS statistical
programming system (SAS, 1990).
The results of this analysis are presented in Tables 9-
3 and 9-4 for total fruits and vegetables, Table 9-5 for
individual fruits and vegetables, and Tables 9-6 and 9-7 the
various USDA categories and exposed/protected and root
food items, respectively. These tables are presented at the
end of this Chapter. The results are presented in units of
g/kg-day. Thus, use of these data in calculating potential
dose does not require the body weight factor to be included
in the denominator of the average daily dose (ADD)
equation. It should be noted that converting these intake
rates into units of g/day by multiplying by a single average
body weight is inappropriate, because individual intake
rates were indexed to the actual body weights of the survey
respondents. However, if there is a need to compare the
total intake data presented here to other intake data in units
of g/day, a body weight less than 70 kg (i.e., approximately
60 kg; calculated based on the number of respondents in
each age category and the average body weights for these
age groups, as presented in Chapter 7 of Volume I) should
be used because the total survey population included
children as well as adults.
The advantages of using the CSFIt data set are that
the data are expected to be generally representative of the
U.S. population and that it includes data on a wide variety
of food types. However, it should be noted that the survey
covers only the 48 coterminous U.S. States; Hawaii, Alaska,
and U.S. Territories are not included. The data set is the
most recent of a series of publicly available data sets (i.e.,
NFCS 1977/78; NFCS 1987/88; CSFH 1989-91) from
USDA, and should reflect current eating patterns in the
United States. The data set includes three years of intake
data combined. However, the CSFII data are based on a
three day survey period. Short-term dietary data may not
accurately reflect long-term eating patterns. This is
particularly true for the tails (extremes) of the distribution
of food intake. In addition, the adjustment for including
mixtures adds uncertainty to the intake rate distributions.
The calculation for including mixtures assumes that intake
of any mixture includes all of the foods identified in
Appendix Table A9-1 in the proportions specified in that
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
9-3
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
1
1 Northeast
2 Midwest
3 South
4 West
1 Central City
2 Suburban
Spring
Summer
Fall
Winter
1
2
3
4
5, 8. 9 Oiher/NA
Table 9-1. Sub-category Codes and Definitions Used in the CSFII 1989-91 Analysis
> Description
Region'
Includes Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey. New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode
Island, and Vermont
Includes Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas. Michigan, Minnesota. Missouri. Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South
Dakota, and Wisconsin
Includes Alabama. Arkansas, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana,
Maryland. Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and West
Virginia
Includes Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington,
Urbanization
Cities with populations of 50,000 or more that is the main city within the metropolitan statistical area (MSA).
An area that is generally within the boundaries of an MSA/ but is not within the legal limit of the central city.
An area that is not within an MSA.
Season
April, May, June
July, August, September
October, November, December
January, February, March
Race
White (Caucasian)
Black
Asian and Pacific Islander
Native American, Aleuts, and Eskimos
* Alaska and Hawaii were not included.
Source: CSFII 1989-1991.
Page
9-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-2. Weighted and Unweighted Number of Observations for CSFII Data
Used in Analysis of Food Intake
Demographic Factor
Total
Age
<01
01-02
03-05
06-11
12-19
20-39
40-69
70+
Season
Fall
Spring
Summer
Winter
Urbanization
Central City
Nomnetropolitan
Suburban
Race
Asian
Black
Native American
Other/NA
White
Region
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Weighted
242.707,000
7,394,000
7,827,000
11795,000
21,830,000
26,046,000
78,680,000
71,899,000
17,236,000
60,633,000
60,689,000
60,683,000
60,702,000
73.410,000
53,993,000
115,304,000
2,871,000
29,721,000
2,102,000
7,556,000
200,457,000
59,285,000
50,099,000
83,741,000
49,582,000
Unweighted
11,912
424
450
603
1,147
1,250
3.555
3,380
1,103
3,117
3,077
2,856
2,862
3,607
3,119
5,186
149
1,632
- 171
350
9,610
3,007
2,180
4,203
2,522
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
9-5
-------
Volume II > Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
table. This may under- or over-estimate intake of certain
foods among some individuals.
9.2.3. Key Fruits and Vegetables Serving Size
Study Based on the USDA NFCS
Pao et al. (1982) - Foods Commonly Eaten by-
Individuals - Using data gathered in the 1977-78 USDA
NFCS, Pao et al. (1982) calculated distributions for the
quantities of individual fruit and vegetables consumed per
eating occasion by members of the U.S. population (i.e.,
serving sizes), over a 3-day period. The data were collected
during NFCS home interviews of 37,874 respondents, who
were asked to recall food intake for the day preceding the
interview, and record food intake the day of the interview
and the day after the interview.
Serving size data are presented on an as consumed
(g/day) basis. The data presented in Table 9-8 are for all
ages of the population, combined. If age-specific intake
data are needed, refer to Pao et al. (1982). Although
serving size data only are presented in this Handbook,
pcrcentiles for the average quantities of individual fruits and
vegetables consumed by member of the U.S. population
who had consumed these fruits and vegetables over a 3-day
period can be found in Pao et al. (1982).
The advantages of using these data are that they were
derived from the USDA NFCS and are representative of the
U.S. population. This data set provides serving size
distributions for a number of commonly eaten fruits and
vegetables, but the list of foods is limited and does not
account for fruits and vegetables included in complex food
dishes. Also, these data represent the quantity of fruits and
vegetables consumed per eating occasion. Although these
estimates are based on USDA NFCS 1977-78 data, more
recent data on serving size were not available. These
estimates may be useful for assessing acute exposures to
contaminants in specific foods, or other assessments where
the amount consumed per eating occasion is necessary.
9.2.4. Relevant Fruits and Vegetables Intake Studies
The U.S. EPA's Dietary Risk Evaluation System
(ORES) - USEPA, Office of Pesticide Programs - The U.S.
EPA, Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) uses the Dietary
Risk Evaluation System (formerly the Tolerance
Assessment System) to assess the dietary risk of pesticide
use as part of the pesticide registration process. OPP sets
tolerances for specific pesticides on raw agricultural
commodities based on estimates of dietary risk. These
estimates are calculated using pesticide residue data for the
food item of concern and relevant consumption data. Intake
rates are based primarily on the USDA 1977-1978 NFCS
although intake rates for some food items are based on
estimations from production volumes or other data (i.e.,
some items were assigned an arbitrary value of 0.000001
g/kg-day) (Kariya, 1992). OPP has calculated per capita
intake rates of individual fruits and vegetables for 22
subgroups (age, regional, and seasonal) of the population by
determining the composition of NFCS food items and
disaggregating complex food dishes into their component
raw agricultural commodities (RACs) (White et al. 1983).
The DRES per capita, as consumed intake rates for
all age/sex/demographic groups combined are presented in
Table 9-9. These data are based on both consumers and
non consumers of these food items. Data for specific
subgroups of the population are not presented here, but are
available through OPP via direct request. The data in Table
9-9 may be useful for estimating the risks of exposure
associated with the consumption of individual fruits and
vegetables. It should be noted that these data are indexed to
the actual body weights of the survey respondents and are
expressed in units of grams of food consumed per kg
bodyweight per day. Consequently, use of these data in
calculating potential dose does not require the body weight
factor in the denominator of the ADD equation. It should
also be noted that conversion of these intake rates into units
of g/day by multiplying by a single average body weight is
not appropriate because the DRES data base did not rely on
a single body weight for all individuals. Instead, DRES
used the body weights reported by each individual surveyed
to estimate consumption in units of g/kg-day.
The advantages of using these data are that complex
food dishes have been disaggregated to provide intake rates
for a very large number of fruits and vegetables. These data
are also based on the individual body weights of the
respondents. Therefore, the use of these data in calculating
exposure to toxic chemicals may provide more
representative estimates of potential dose per unit body
weight. However, because the data are based on NFCS
short-term dietary recall the same limitations discussed
previously for other NFCS data sets also apply here. In
addition, consumption patterns may have changed since the
data were collected in 1977-78. OPP is in the process of
translating consumption information from the USDA CSFII
1989-91 survey to be used in DRES.
Food and Nutrient Intakes of Individuals in One
Day in the U.S., USDA (1980, 1992b) - USDA calculated
mean intake rates for total fruits and total vegetables using
NFCS data from 1977-78 and 1987-88 (USDA, 1980;
USDA, 1992b). The mean total intake rates are presented
Page
9-6
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
in Tables 9-10 and 9-11 for fruits and Tables 9-12 and 9-13
for vegetables. These values are based on intake data for
one day from the 1977-78 and 1987-88 USDA Nationwide
Food Consumption Surveys, respectively. Data from both
surveys are presented here to demonstrate that although the
1987-88 survey had fewer respondents, the mean per capita
intake rates for all individuals are in good agreement with
the earlier survey. Also, slightly different age classifications
were used in the two surveys providing a wider range of age
categories from which exposure assessors may select
appropriate intake rates. Tables 9-10 through 9-13 include
both per capita intake rates and intake rates for consumers-
only for various ages of individuals. Intake rates for
consumers-only were calculated by dividing the per capita
consumption rate by the fraction of the population using
vegetables or fruits in a day. The average per capita
vegetable intake rate is 201 g/day based on the 1977-78
data (USDA, 1980) and 182 g/day based on the 1987-88
data (USDA, 1992b). For fruits the average per capita
intake rate is 142 g/day based on the two most recent
USDANFCSs (USDA, 1980; USDA, 1992b).
The advantages of using these data are that they
provide intake estimates for all fruits and all vegetables
combined. Again, these estimates are based on one-day
dietary data which may not reflect usual consumption
patterns.
U.S. EPA - Office of Radiation Programs - The U.S.
EPA Office of Radiation Programs (ORP) has also used the
USDA 1977-1978 NFCS to estimate daily, food intake
(U.S. EPA, 1984a; 1984b). ORP uses food consumption
data to assess human intake of radio nuclides in foods. The
1977-1978 NFCS data have been reorganized by ORP, and
food items have been classified according to the
characteristics of radionuclide transport. Data for selected
agricultural products are presented in Table 9-14 and Table
9-15. These data represent per capita, as consumed intake
rates for total, leafy, exposed, and protected produce as well
as total grains, breads, and cereals. Exposed produce refers
to products (e.g., apples, pears, berries, etc.) that can
intercept atmospherically deposited materials. The term
protected refers to products (e.g., citrus fruit, carrots, corn,
etc.) that are protected from deposition from the
atmosphere. Although the fruit and vegetable
classifications used in the study are somewhat limited in
number, they provide alternative food categories that may
be useful to exposure assessors. Because this study was
based on the USDA NFCS, the limitations discussed
previously regarding short-term dietary recall data also
apply to the intake rates reported here. Also, consumption
patterns may have changed since the data were collected in
1977-78. :
U.S. EPA - Office of Science and Technology - The
U.S. EPA Office of Science and Technology (OST) within
the.. Office of Water (formerly the Office of Water
Regulations and Standards) used data from the FDA
revision of the Total Diet Study Food Lists and Diets
(Pennington, 1983) to calculate food intake rates (U.S.
EPA, 1989). OST uses these consumption data in its risk
assessment model for land application of municipal sludge.
" The FDA data used are based on the combined results of the
USDA 1977-1978, NFCS and the second National Health
and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES II), 1976-
1980 (U.S. EPA, 1989). Because food items are listed as
prepared complex foods in the FDA Total Diet Study, each
item was broken down into its component parts so that the
amount of raw commodities consumed could be determined.
Table 9-16 presents intake rates of various fruit and
vegetable categories for various age groups and estimated
lifetime ingestion rates that have been derived by U.S. EPA.
Note that these are per capita intake rates tabulated as
grams dry weight/day. Therefore, these rates differ from
those in the previous tables because U.S. EPA (1984a,
1984b) report intake rates on an as consumed basis.
The EPA-OST analysis provides intake rates for
additional food categories and estimates of lifetime average
daily intake on a per capita basis. In contrast to the otherJ
analyses of USDA NFCS data, this study reports the data in
terms of dry weight intake'rates. Thus, conversion is not
required when contaminants are to be estimated on a dry
weight basis. These data, however, may not reflect current
consumption patterns.
Canadian Department of National Health and
Welfare Nutrition Canada Survey - The Nutrition Canada
Survey was conducted between 1970 and 1972 to "(a)
examine the mean consumption of selected food groups and
their contribution to nutrient intakes of Canadians, (b)
examine patterns of food consumption and nutrient intake
at various times of the day, and provide information on the
changes in eating habits during pregnancy." (Canadian
Department of National Health and Welfare, n.d.). The
method used for collecting dietary intake data was 24-hour
recall. The recall method relied on interview techniques in
which the interviewee was asked to recall all foods and
beverages consumed during the day preceding the
interview. Intake rates were reported for various age/sex
groups of the population and for pregnant women (Table 9-
17). The report does not specify whether the values
represent per capita or consumer-only intake rates.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996 ___
Page
9-7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
However, they appear to be consistent with the as consumed
intake rates for consumers-only reported by USDA (1980,
1992b). It should be noted that these data are also based on
short-term dietary recall and are based on the Canadian
population.
USDA. I993b - Food Consumption, Prices, and
Expenditures, J 970-92 - The USDA's Economic Research
Service (ERS) has calculated the amount of food available
for human consumption in the United States on an annual
basis (USDA, 1993b). Supply and utilization balance
sheets have been generated, based on the flow of food items
from production to end uses for the years 1970 to 1992.
Total available supply was estimated as the sum of
production and imports (USDA, 1993b). The availability
of food for human use commonly termed as "food
disappearance" was determined by subtracting exported
. foods (USDA, 1993b). USDA (1993b) calculated the per
capita food consumption by dividing the total food
disappearance by the total U.S. population. USDA (1993b)
estimated per capita consumption data for various fruit and
1 vegetable products from 1970-1992 (1992 data are
preliminary). In this section, the 1991 values, which are the
most recent final data, are presented. Retail weight per
capita data are presented in Table 9-18. These data have
been derived from the annual per capita values in units of
pounds per year, presented by USDA (1993b), by
converting to units of g/day.
One of the limitations of this study is that
disappearance data do not account for losses from the food
supply from waste or spoilage. As a result, intake rates
based on thuve data may overestimate daily consumption
because they are based on the total quantity of marketable
commodity utilized. Thus, these data represent bounding
estimates of intake rates only. It should also be noted that
per capita estimates based on food disappearance is not a
direct measure of actual consumption or quantity ingested,
instead the data are used as indicators of changes in usage
over time (USDA, 1993b). An advantage of this study is
that it provides per capita consumption rates for fruits and
vegetables that are representative of long-term intake
because disappearance data are generated annually.
A1HC, 1994 - Exposure Factors Sourcebook - The
ATJHC Sourcebook (AIHC, 1944) uses the data presented in
the 1989 version of the Exposure Factors Handbook which
reported data from the USDA 1977'-78 MFCS.
Distributions are provided in the @Risk format and the
ฉRisk formula is also provided. In this Handbook, new
analyses of more recent data from the USDA 1989/91
CSFH are presented. Numbers, however, cannot be directly
compared with previous values since the results from the
new analysis are presented on a body weight basis.
The Sourcebook was classified as a relevant study
because it was not the primary source for the data to make
recommendations in this document. However, it can be
used as an alternative source of information.
The advantage of using the CSFII and USDA NFCS
data sets are that they are the largest publicly available data
source on food intake patterns in the United States. Data
are available for a wide variety of fruit and vegetable
products and are intended to be representative of the U.S.
population.
9.2,5. Conversion Between As Consumed and Dry
, Weight Intake Rates
fji As noted previously, intake rates may be reported in
.terms of units as consumed or units of dry weight. It is
essential that exposure assessors be aware of this difference
so that they may ensure consistency between the units used
for intake rates and those used for concentration data (i.e.,
if the unit of food consumption is grams dry weight/day,
.then the unit for the amount of pollutant in the food should
be grams dry weight). .
If necessary, as consumed intake rates may be
converted to dry weight intake rates using the moisture
content percentages presented in Table 9-19 and the
following equation:
= nv Kioo-wyioo]
(Eqn. 9-1)
"Dry weight" intake rates may be converted to "as
consumed" rates by using:
IR,,. = IRdw/[(100-W)/100]
where:
(Eqn. 9-2)
IRdw = dry weight intake rate;
IRac = as consumed intake rate; and
W = percent water content.
9.3. RECOMMENDATIONS
The CSFH data described in this section was used in
selecting recommended fruit and vegetable intake rates for
the general population and various subgroups of the United
Page
9-8
Exposure Factors Handbook
. August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
States population. The general design of both key and
relevant .studies are summarized in Table 9-20. Table 9-21
presents a summary of the recommended values for fruit and
vegetable intake and Table 9-22 presents the confidence
ratings for the fruit and vegetable intake recommendations.
Based on the CSFII1989-91, the recommended per capita
fruit intake rate for the general population is 3.4 g/kg-day
and the recommended per capita vegetable intake rate for
the general population is 4.3 g/kg-day. Per capita intake
rates for specific food items, on a g/kg-day basis, may be
obtained from Table 9-5. Percentiles of the per capita
intake rate distribution in the general population for total
fruits and total vegetables are presented in Tables 9-3 and
9-4. From these tables, the 95th percentile intake rates for
fruits and vegetables are 12 g/kg-day and 10 g/kg-day,
respectively. It is important to note that the distributions
presented in Tables 9-3 through 9-4 are based on data
collected over a 3-day period and may not necessarily
reflect the long-term distribution of average daily intake
rates. However, for these broad categories of food (i.e.,
total fruits and total vegetables), because they are eaten on
a daily basis throughout the year with minimal seasonality,
the short term distribution may be a reasonable
approximation of the long-term distribution, although it will
display somewhat increased variability. This implies that
the upper percentiles shown here will tend to overestimate
the corresponding percentiles of the true long-term
distribution. Intake rates for the home-produced form of
these fruit and vegetable products are presented in Volume
II, Chapter 4.
This section a!so presents recommendations for
serving size for various fruits and vegetables. These
recommendations are based on the USDA NFCS 1977-78
data. Table 9-23 presents the confidence ratings for the
serving size recommendations. Percentiles of the serving
size, as well as mean values can be obtained from Table 9-
9.4. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 9
American Industrial Health Council (AIHC). (1994)
Exposure factors sourcebook. AIHC, Washington,
DC.
Canadian Department of National Health and Welfare,
Bureau of National Sciences, Health Protection
Branch (n.d.). Food Consumption, Patterns Report:
A report from Nutrition Canada.
Kariya, J. (1992) Written communication to L. Phillips,
Versar, Inc., March 4, 1992.
Pao, E.M.; Fleming, K.H.; Guenther, P.M.; Mickle, S.J.
(1982) Foods commonly eaten by individuals:
amount per day and per eating occasion. U.S.
Department of Agriculture. Home Economics
Report No. 44.
Pennington, J.A.T. (1983) Revision of the total diet
study food list and diets. J. Am. Diet. Assoc.
82:166-173.
SAS Institute, Inc. (1990) SAS Procedures Guide,
Version 6, Third Edition, Gary, NC: SAS Institute,
Inc., 1990, 705pp.
USDA. (1972) Food consumption: households in the
United Stales, Seasons and year 1965-1966. U.S.
Department of Agriculture.
USDA. (1980) Food and nutrient intakes of individuals
in one day in the United States, Spring 1977.
Nationwide Food Consumption Survey 1977-1978.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Preliminary Report
No. 2.
USDA. (1992a) Changes in food consumption and
expenditures in American households during the
1980s. U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Washington, D.C. Statistical Bulletin No. 849.
USDA. (1992b) Food and nutrient intakes by
individuals in the United States, 1 day, 1987-88:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Human Nutrition
Information Service. Nationwide Food Consumption
Survey 1987-88, NFCS Rpt. No. 87-1-1.
USDA. (1993a) Food and nutrient intakes by
individuals in the United Stales, 1 day, 1989-91.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural
Research Service. NFS Report No. 91-2.
USDA. (1993b) Food consumption prices and
expenditures (1970-1992) U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Statistical
Bulletin, No. 867.
U.S. EPA. (1984a) An estimation of the daily average
food intake by age and sex for use in assessing the
radionuclide intake of individuals in the general
population. EPA-520/1-84-021.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
9-9
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
U.S. EPA. (1984b) An estimation of the daily food
intake based on data from the 1977-1978 USD A
Nationwide Food Consumption Survey.
Washington, DC: Office of Radiation Programs.
EPA-520/1-84-015.
U.S. EPA. (1989) Development of risk assessment
methodologies for land application and distribution
and marketing of municipal sludge. Washington,
DC: Office of Science and Technology. EPA 6007-
89/001.
White, S.B.; Peterson, B.; Clayton, C.A.; Duncan, D.P.
(1983) Interim Report Number 1: The construction
of a raw agricultural commodity consumption data
base. Prepared by Research Triangle Institute for
EPA Office of Pesticide Programs.
Page
9-10
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II -
F00t? Ingestion
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits
Factors , , St^lR
' ?^KX2ai.
and Vegetables mx&J
*>ป
a
1
I
i
I
"5
s
H
s
a
j
CJ
1
g
51
o>
O\
DM
ปn
e
Q*
^
e-
CL
O
a.
ฃ
o
a!
ฃ
51
w
S
_ g
ง 1
ฃ I
J3 0.
1 1
a. O
r-
o
CJ
rj-
n
so
(S
*
^
ฃt
00
t^.
VO
-j
oo .
vq
0
0
o
o
o
o
oo
#>
o
en
u>
1
H ซ
d o\
tป-
o o'
ป OO
CJ
c4 p-
oo* cj
oo ปn
r- ON
p*. \q
CJ O
OO O
in in
en es
ON 0 ON 0
M (*!
2
_;
4
f-
NO*
ซ
^
2
ON
M
~
^
-1
^
vO
en
o
o
o
0
I
o
in
es
ON
p*
NO
SESS S^f2K PSS SSSSS
NO min Tooow-i. OTJ-TJ- oooox en ' <*
rf c4 o oo r* oo o en cjino
Cl ' CJ CJ CJ C4 (S
ONOCJON es -sj- en-d-rn -^ NO oo oo
oocjmoo vo r- m r-o so in NO r* ซ*
^i Q Q M fv) ( NO cj r*^ NO
^, ซ- _* mrJCJcj CJCJCJ cJcJCJ-^tcj
^.mm_
c>3 ^ p1* en T^ cJ cJ "^ ON cJ "^ NO en o ON CJ
P-, NO so oo en ..CJ,, cJ c4 cJ en OCJNOTJ-CJ
so oo o r* o en p- ,en c-lcjen OOP^CJP*-
in" >n in NO oo" p*- p^ oo*r p-"p-"od r-*p^p*o'p^
~ ~
en oo cJ cJ ON ^ CJ CJ o ON 'tf r** cj en o
encjen^f mTj--^^ rren^t NOTt-n-inrj-
NONONOCJ NOmOCJ NO O O 00 P- \O
_;-:ซcj _;ซ-:_: _:ซซ ^ ซ ซ ซ ซ
OOOON OOOO OOC) "tO OOO
00 Cl
o -:
oooo oooo ooo ooooo
oooo oooo ooo ooooo
oooo oooo ooo, ooooo
in NO P- ON so ปON rj-enen cjoooinui
ON >n *n oo so ^ en ^ * ^ en oo ON NO p~ซ
oooo oooo ooo ooooo
oo r- oo p-^too OOOND m r^ * cj m
cJ "^ eM eN m en m en en m m in , en en ^ m
NOoooen ONen-^-^- oo^j- cJ p^ ^- ON ซ
es oo m oo oo o oo oop-o p- m ^t o
. 1 1
.1 & ^. S
3 1 1 5 1 -a 1 1 * 1 ^ 1 1 1 1 * S 1 1 1
eN -^ p- tป ti-coco^D Oe&oKn
cj en cj cj
o m r- ซ
CJ Tf
r^ P- ON oo
oo en en
p^ oo p^ ON
c-
o r^ oo "^
"**"*
00 Tf CM 00
' ri
o g o r-
0 p
.oooo
oooo
oooo
o m >n r-
CM ** O 00
oooo
f*^ VO OO
r*i r^ r^i r^
ON 0V 0 *
ON r*~. rj w(
llll 3
< S Z C/3 >
. ' ' '
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
9-11
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
_
V
V!
Bฃ
>
H
s
1
&
\~
8
CL
0.
a.
9
0
r-
0.
o
V,
0.
o
ฃ
Qu
UJ
c
2
c
H f
Ou o
ง
1 ง
ON ON O VO O Tf r~- CN VOONOOON ONVDOO vD O t4- Tj- ON VO OO ON VO
ON ON >nmooomON ปn ON vo vo ON>nvo r*- F- ON m vo ON in
Tf *T e*4 in ~ p"- i-* Tf oo in ^t~ ~" ON "d~ in vo CN M ^ in ~^ ^j* in
s s s s a s s 5 s ฃ s 2 s SP^S sags P.. gjgss
in ON inoo"r4oo t-^inu-ju-i vo'voin iricdeninvS vdininin
O ON NO' iri oo't^-r~-od O'ON'ONON ONOO' -^r < -^ON ON ' ON ON
ซ rj r~ r-vpo-ovoc, RB'PS SSS SgฃRS S^iSfS
-"-""" ""
_ _ o, p. . ^ , u^^ซ^^ ^mvi r-^vovo^ in ซ wi wi
o 55 =0 SSg:S5!S ^^Sf2 SPS S2SSiS i^PSK
m in t~- in ^~ en en en en en en en en en m en en en ^ ^ m en i*n en en
NO O in ON ON vo vo ON r* oo ON vo OOTfO VOONOVOO ON r- m
CN NO r-O o -^- CN es en o -si- en o ON ซ*<* en omeneN
eN ^~ encneNtseses i ' 'cs ' i cs CN oleN.e^ieN
ON o oJ ineNOeN-^-r^- ซovoo m oo cDONOr^ON enmONvo enori- omr-en < m i- o
e-* r- r-j oor-enenr- vomปnซn mvo^ en ON r- oo en vor-^i-vo
O en c** CN^-OOOO oooo ooo enooi *o oooo
o o" o* oooooo oooo* ooo* ooo'o'o 0*000
ON eN CN in ON r-- ON oo vom ^f ONOVO enooOeNON en^hoooo
in o in eN ^ o eป ^ vo vo ON oo ON in in ON ซ*ซ eN oo vo CN CN o\ vo vo
CN oo ON mooint^-o en o en OTJ-C^ ON eN oo t cs ^ Tf CN -*
^ vo" r*- t^-inenenenTl- ^^J-'*TJ: ^TJ-^J- ^* ^* rf ^ ^t- ^ rj* Tt ^
^ ,ฃ ^ ^^^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^ ^^^^^ ^^^^
cN oo vo CNVO c^cn'en OOONOO rt-envo en vo vo OCN^J-ON
f* -^- *n r-*r--oo"o6ooo6 r^ vd r*- r-' r-"vo"r-- envor-vor- r^r^ri~'vo
ON t*- ON ONONO\ONONON ONONONON ONONON ONONOOONON ON ON ON ' ON
e g
.ง >> i 1
"*8s*ง J*3- -ซ
It! 1 liillslilliilillllllitllil
s
CJ
o\
i?
o **
i's
MI
6*1
"^p ^ "
111
* f ง
% OH I
to
I I
P-/2
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors [*0jif\
~^WjJ>
. '^r4
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables hffifow
^
1
6
"5
1
i
4.
1
CC
.1
&
*5
.1
.a
|
|
IT
d.
2
H
uj
=i B
g 2
m
I ''
C/3
ง
S s
si
ฃ i
u
S
fl
5
sj
U C
i 5
614 i
GO
U ง
1*
a]
J3
o
O
c
o
CO
If
O
d
s
d
#
0
o
o
d
S
d
oq
'
1
d
oa
0
d
*
d
d
rf
?3
II
(N~ ooooo Sooo
oooooooo oddd
ON ^r >r. *o r-
r**ฃ>CT^ odfMo'''J:o^ ' o\ f-i rs
CS t f. C*t OJ fN tN tN (*ซ r*J f*".
c c
>s'i *=
OSS J < -a
il|ilill|i|ll|
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
1
ฃ
>i
o
*T3
61
I
I
8
1
o
i
!2
I
U.
3
;|
1
"o
Jฃ
s
o>
ju
C3
U4
C/l
2 c
"= J
3 ^
a
U
_ c
1]
i
Ul
e/3
E I
0 ซS
O
- 1
JE
vO(Ni ONOOVO Tt-ONTj-o moo vo cs ON r^ rj-oor--
o\o-<3-n~. oo _ o ^ mn ON >n oo o oo TJ* o vo f- oo cs ^ vo "- * * vo ^ ON m co n ON oo ON r*ซ r*- o ON o r*J m xh oo vo oo o oo
OO OOO OOOO o 0 -d" OOO OO 0
oooooooo oooo ooo ooooo oooo
^^t*iss $s*g gs$ gf^^s *iงg
^ ~!w"Jtril/"3or^ cs'rics cifnci r-^nS^PeN o-^^J-
e c
_ 3, 8
ง >> i '8
IB = Q. ฃ
S3 .EJ^งซ ^ z "8 S
S o o ~ ~ ^. S+ |-.= lllll = 8 a "S 1 ป .ง 1, | 1 5 a
V5oo-Nn-r-lซW,coM?SUZcoBS
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
1
t
1
e
e
^
V)
a
2
e
j
"O
c
Q
i
1
ฃ
1
5
,ฃ
a>
|
is
1
a
H
e
1 1
O
*_. i
ง i
1 1
u
8
2 1
6 ^
u
*- .ฃ
4J E
2 5
^ e.
tt]
C/3
| "
rt
.ง
S "c
||
CW
u c
1 1
5
, g
1 s
^(S
Cu
1
a
=
1
S.
ฃ
o
o
o
o
o
o
f
r-^
r
o
o
o
i
o
5^
m
"^
s
o
0
1
o
ง
o
ง
o
o*
g.
o
ฃ
*
3 <
H -<
CN ซ o O
OOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOO
o o o o' o o' o o'
^^^^^^^^
- 2 S 5 2 i 1 2
ง00 \o oo r- vo o
VO ^T CM CM CM
o o o o o o o
o o o" o o* o* o* o*
m rj- m vj oo oo in
ooซo oo
OOOOOOOO
OOOO 0 OOO
^v^^^&s^^^
v}CMt--mTj-ooor--
OOOO -CM
S g f- ป CM m <*
ooOooooo
o o" o o o .0 o
ss^ssgsg
ooOooooo
o o 00*000'
S^oSvlSS^
o o" o o" o" o
voo* r*-*3root*-
oooooooo
OOOOOOOO
O ; CM CMCMCM
o o o o" o o' o o'
^gfgfggf
. oo o\ ^o o ^f * r-*
\o cMfn^-rj-inm
M _^ e
o o ^ m xo -t- 6
j O ' ~ ' ' ' i fl
Vooo c"M?r"2t5
1 i
o o
Si
o o
* *
2 2
O ซN
0 0
*f o\
o o
0 0
o o
tS E?
O OO
o o
o .n
0 O
0 O
o o
0 0
O 0
lo 0
o
o
o o
o o
in o\
r~ in
CN
o' o'.
* in
oo en
m "*
m
1 'I
ss
o' o" '
O tn
S S
O O
Hi *
2 i
ปn CM
S o
o , o
VO vO
O 0
t^ eฃ
CM m
n -ft
OOO
ooo
ooo
m m '
o S o-
O 0 O i
^ # #
1 2 i
oo in rj
ooo
ooo
^t m o
ooo
ooo
ฃฃ EfJ ^
o oo r-l
oo r*-
ooo
ooo
o o
ooo
ooo
ซ ^ ง
o o
ooo
ooo
\O CM
0\ CM -* *o
g ง 1
1-S c 3 (
o z 3, u
S
o
ON
O
o
#
o*
S
0
o
o
t^
(-^
ป
0
o
S
o
0
8
o
en
CM
O
*
ง
I ง
! 1
CM
O ,O
o o
0 0
0 O
^^
vo m
ง o
o
0 <=
o
tฃ ts
o
rN 0
,
S 0
o
1 o
o'
ง ง
O 0
tn
0 0
O 0
Tt VO
en Tf
o o
. r-
1
'C
ฃ
ป
rn
. g 1
D -a *C "~
i 1 5
i
o
m
0
o'
*
2
c^
o
o
c
c
JJJ
f^
o
0
C2
o
o
c^
c
o
?.
c
c
o
ฃ
c^
o'
T~-
w
1
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996 '
Page
9-15
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
1
.ฃ
I
^
f
1
I
1
12
I
-5
V
a
"5
S
^-
Ul
1
ง s
Cu
M
1 ^
ซ ^
U
ti3
c
11
Q.
ซ
Si
ฃl
C/l
J3
S
(X
sf
Jc
o
0
w
8 _
1 1
co S
6
u
_ c
c '5
S) g
CJ
c
o
a
3 a
ฐ- 5
o S
Q. Q
ง
o'
S
o
oq
CS
vo
3
O*
oa
S
0
0
CO
Tf
ON
O
0
to
o*
vo
CO
fv.
o
o
o
0
ปn
oi
*a
I
tt
o'
ri
O
S
R
o"
r-ป
^
m
es
00
o'
in
o
^
^t
VO
CO
O*
o\
o
o"
0?
o
4) "^
M 0
< V
00
O
o"
ฃ
O
^
5
o
o
0
r^
M
00
o
oo
o
f
oo
S
0
ง
o'
*
2
o
S
o
2
o
^
^
o
o"
0
V)
"^
o*
oo
0
o
o
r*-
o
0*
I
o
M
r-l
9
S
OJ ol -- r-i
OOOOO
o' o o o o
2 S o o
ooooo
8 ^ ง o? S
SS5SS
ooooo
0 0 p p
ooooo
0 0 0 0 ปg
|ฃ ^ ^: ftj ฃ
r* en cl u-i r^-
m r- a\ _ m
ooooo
o' o d o o
w> oo ro o\ vo
C1) O O 'O ^^
ooooo
g g g # ฃ
^ \ea -rh OQ ^O
vo ON O co o
in cs co M ^r
ooooo
00*0*0*0
(N ro ^>
o o o o p
o o" o o o
ง ง CO S 2
O t~* cxso-^t "- (N ซ~i co o ^vor-oc
r-j __, _ _ (-^ _. t*-rocotri ซf^
oooo pop pppop oppp
0*0*00* o ' o* o ooooo oooo
oo~ o"o o ooo o 2 o
o'oo'o ooo ooooo oooo'
Svo^S * wn ^ S 0 1; H in 1^ vi ri ^
t-- vOO> ^ fO O vo CO ON CM "*'$f*lS
o^-tvoco Oico^n u~iปnปnooiป3' V)VOCN'Ov o^fr*->n
cNCNcsin co CN tncovo^o-r CjCiSS^t
o o o o o o o o o ~ o o o p p c
0*000* o' 0*0* o'oo'o'o oooo
sisS sis slsss sssi
o o o o o""o' o o'oo'o'o oooo
vocTv-3-o ovvor r*-ovfiovoo mtst^r*^
c4 c^ri ri cs ricstMOiN cs m f>
i ง
ง S -n
| a 1 g |< -ซ
u^'o.l^'S ง งง ^ '3 '^ ง .S ii- Jg o ~
JSlStnM^DUZMBS-^coZO^BSSZco?
Page
9-16
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
1
1
I
?
(2^
8
9
S
QJ
1
1
42
1
1
'1
'J
s
s
3
S
in
S
H
W
S c
1 1
ซ 2
&
ll
<3 c
u
W
t/a
ง |
CQ 2
c
00
bi
o a
oj ^
CL ง
u
w
a
2 S
1" ^
u
*- .c
ง =
*J
s
ฃ2 1
|S
*- _c
u 5
O 3
ฃ C
. 6
n.
3
2
O
._
1
o
o
o
o
s
m
0
0
o
I
o
^
O
cs
ts
S
d
\o
S
o
0
-*
0
o
s
0
^
trj
SO
14
^ooooooo'ooo r-n oivDOfSfn w-iONO\v,
2RSSSSSS 5 S S 'S SSS ^S?S5 SSSS
ooo" ooooo 0*00*0 ooo* oooo oooo
co.^r.voaocso
O OOOOOO o OO' OOO ซn O OOO OOOO
o'o'o'o'o'o'oo oooo* ooo ,00" ooo oooo
SSSSSSS2 ฃiSgฃ ^Si S S 2 f S $ S' g S
o' * fi f*"i O4 or. ^^m or, oo-. g' -ro-to-
OOOOOOO OOOO OOO OOOOO OOOO
odoo'o'o'o'o o'oo'o" ooo" ooooo ooo-o
^ fi "*i" r*i c*l \o ^$" ^ ^ Ox r^ co c*i ^ vo ON CQ o\ oo o vo r*- r^~
oooooooo oooo* ooo" oo'ooo ooo'o"
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ lฃฃฃtฃ EฃEฃEฃ$ฃ E^E^t^ ^^^E^^ E^ Eฃ E^ E^
t'-osovoc'^cDmtn tnoxf^r^- <-4f*"iO TJ- m rj-r^r*", m.
\D Tf if} *f) CO ON fS *f) ' *ซ OO (N f*"l O fN f^l ro ^* Vi " ' f"l ON "T t~-
CM CJ d (N CJ ci r* r*ป
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
1
~
%
ฃ
1
I
1
i
s
S
1
^
J?
o
2
Ul
ll
a
a|
<ฃ 1
CJ
C/J
||
s
H
ป
K-i
g i
u
Cl
o
g
31
t
o o'o'o'oooo'o" oooo ooo"' 000*0*0 oo'o'o
ง gBS8BB8-8 งiงง iSl flSli 11 II
ซ c4 0*00 o _~._o
* * * ****** **** *** ***** ****
ฃ SSooS'Soooooo ooSooog o^Soo F:S8o3r:o8 ooSoooo
o SSSooooS oooo o^o S S o o oooc
o 000*0*0*000 oooo ooci 'o'oooo oooo
o * ซ oooo 00*00 ooo w. o o -" o o o o c
>ซ ปfi>*3rieH5^^1f'ir'i *ฃrStStS ฐtSt^ *aฐQtS^ ^tSฐtfi
~" ^^^^^"ftfS^ pl*SซhCS*"" *~* S^ ^ or""-* c4 |S'|'El'fiuejซ5il'"งi^j:_
itfiiliSiRlilsliaili-i.rielliiii
l
i
i I
1:
S *
ฃ *
|||
^1|
It ii S
" O
1
a
H 't
1 I
Page
9-18
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
1
1
2
*
.]
u
c
ฃ
c
.s:
c
j
q
2
j
i
%d
t
l
53
i
ง" S
1
5 *
8
^
a
ซ e
1 s
i;
tu
w
I I
i
c ซ
= !
Ul
a =
CJ 3
s s
JD
"S
> g
in
3 53 *
tu
Ji "
& i
> s
g
I ll
"
|
I Population
'O O^OOJdWlO'JvCvD'C'IOCS ' f* **" f ซ "I ^ I*. Tf f*ป O* O \O f
**" Q f", O >P ซ*% C4 tN TT r*". m f". r*v r*l f . M O TT O O -* f>l 5f P3 f
q s ฐ^^
r-soS*c-)Oซ^^ vi ^ ^fr Tf pi ซ M ^ ^ ri r-Svtol'
3ซ r*\ oo ซ*i i ^- od r^ w *** t*i **J . w r*~I ^j- vi od vj vo" ** ^ fi f1
Ttr-r-oooooboooo oooooooo oo od w oo ^-Prioo oooooooo
ง ilf-|gli -S^S SS2 5 S s S p งS|S
o cJoo"o"ooc5 oooo" o'o'o* oooo'o' o"oo*o
^1* QoONCJTfiQr^vici virM^^h cPvivo y5Of**ooปri f . (*. r^
" Svl00.(S*OCT;r>ioo r^pMO; OOx?J Jn oo K vi *-J K S? <*
<^ 2 t- "*>**"** O itN c4 o" f*-^r4r4c4 IN ri c-
1 Illlllll III1 111 111!
i H^SSitil Is i'i ssi งSSงI ilii
o ooooooo'o o'o'oo o'oo .o'ooo'o oooo
S งS^iงงIS =aSK SSI | 5 s ง R III!
ปป tSTAOtADOQ^D oonn
g e?"l?^e-efฃ&*t?ilfiljS ^E^^^ G^^GS t^E^^^t^ t^l^^^
O OO NO pVjp^OXOO f^^OOft OOM O ซ t*"i **V 'S' V%\OV1O
"''"'*
o o'o'o'o'oo'o'o" e5o"oo' o'oo csoo'cJo" oo'o'c
"^" r^-cor^ooooovo^ ซX^o\ox ror^i ^5 r^SooSvi c>* K 2 So
o o'o'oo'o'ooo" o'o'o'o o'o'o* o'o'oo'o" o'oo'o
8' SfgSgggf SSSS SSS SSSfS S2gg
8 SSSSStas SiSiSs ฃ228 3-2-s 2s3:ฃ}q
o oooooooo oooo' o'o'ci oooo'o o'o'o'c
S "?งฐ~''>ฐฐ-s SEoSS SRS R2SS!o RooSo!
o o ei o' o' o' o o' o' o o' o o' o' o" o' o" o' o' o o'- o' o' o d
ฃ ^งoocn|Soo!fio tSiS^iS iStStS tSt^otSiS iStStS'lS
2i !Q 2 2' 2 2' S2 S S 2 S 2 g a S 2" S a 5 2 i S S S R
s 1 1
iifiiiiiiiiiiJliSIJiiiiiililii
J
fi
g j
1*
gl I
gss!
Hi
11 II g
II
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
9-19
-------
jjHEpC] Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
*+\i/ t* JL
sffiKr/
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
1
g
^
JC
3
|
^
1
1
S
a
i
^
1
1
s
1
rj
4>
i
H
S
8
1 1
IB. S
a i
5 -! (
jj'i
(!
Ul
c/3
w)
4i
S
i, i
ฃ s
5 s !
ฃ p E
i a
ฃ 8
O
la
|
g S
ta
s !
ฃ =
L.
w
W3
Ii
1
u E
ll
0
t/3
2 0
r.
1 =
ฃ ง
u
0.
D
i
J
i Isliilsl i i i ง sli ^งB = 1 isls
d ddddo'ddd dodo odd do odd dddci
S S?eXcliงงง pJ^ง?? ง?S ^ S oT ^ . S ^^Sง
ง trtrSF^oooooococo S S ป S P oo oo vtPrSvooo So S oo r^
s ssissiosl ssss sss issss ssss
o doddddoo dodo odd ddodo dooo
S 2?ง^งงงง iง "ง -is ง ง' ^ ง ^5ง^p| 5 ฎ ?1 ^
o ddodddd do do odd do" odd do' do
*ฃ#*
S 0. oo-^^-a:
S r*-. ? ft *r rป". t^ rf, A S^ifn?i nfnro r^f. ?if^ f*1r*1finvos n m m ป in . in N r- CTV r-m
5 DS^SSSSo SSSS SSS 2S2S5 SSSS
c> o'c>c5c}O(^Cdc5 oc>oo cJod o'eb'oocS oc5oo
^ งงง^2ง!SS ?n!?CSง ?ซK 2!?SS!? SSS^
cs
tS tS^tฃt$*sS^C$C>OC5c>idC3 O*OC5C> OOO OOOOC5 C3C3OO
o ow^3r^^ rsr- inr-r*r* voml CNOQOO^O Kooซn5
^ ซ,*#*##, ***# *** .S^*** *^QtS ift ฐ A ^ฐtS^ฐ tS^ES^
rSco CNCOTl-r--ftr-- vtNOfto ^Of^ f^ ง ^ o -- mftON^-
^ Ift IT) If! Vป f . f . ^ Vt *1<3-'*3'1. 1 . |
1 1 f 1 1 1 1 1 i ฃ 1 1 1 1 1 1 S J 1 1 1 1 1 1 i I i i 1 1
c
ง2
l!
!i
* * 1
^ *"S
1 ^1
II n g
" ** 1
CC
1 S
>age Exposure Factors Handbook
(-20 August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
i
g
c
CO
.-
t*
b
.ฃ
'|
o
a
1
|
a:
J
g
1
1
1
ง
I
S
23
S
a
1
.S
s
ฃ
0
i
ง
I
00
I
"S3
ง3
3
S
I
i
g-S
ij
s
1
8
1
1
ฎ
S
S
v>
rซ.
s
a
ซ
M J|
'ง = -|
i " ^
it
"ง
o ^
.& 1
1 4c
o*
g,
j!
ซi
ง
i
ms^ munntw*
cocses ซoo.N1co^oiซo._.viปrปปOM-)co.,.
^SvinSeon H2SS!CJC:2E3oo22j^2S^'8
88-0- g^^Bas-fi-^affls
eogcOTfor^vi eovispirtt^'^ eocoaoc^S^oCivo
\O^ซ-*(NCSซ-ซ'^> i^ii^'^ซ^o\o5'^-hป^S00E4'~l
aa-oos^g ssas^sasassss- .
S99tSn?i!n SSSSSSSSKSSSccEi-?
aismo>o CJ5S<=>>"2!2s;5>S>oSJS ป>
;.IJซ3^foovocooo ^C2'^o^ซ^2o*"ooZSI2o''*'
2S-5S35 35aaaaa33S335s.
a ^
1 1 -a'
8-1 1 | 1 ll - |
1
HHKMHM
poซnoo ซ.
2o\r^.CAซr5voOt-coco
eoOtf-*iซ*o\>pS*~'v^Oxoo
ir>o\i/%eipTปoo~a\i'ซ.\oปr
Sง!^85SSP:S38
5^ป^S"""2^^
i
.H ง 'I
2 2 a | Jlls 111
1
s
t
k
8
2
.S
s
1ft
s
s
4J
*s.
Sr
8.
8
ง
J
U
4>
li
S 3
' Percentiles
Source: Pao
w?A
tffiyjfl /
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Pa^e
P-27
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-9. Mean Per Capita Intake Rates (as consumed) for Fruits and Vegetables Based on All Sex/Age/Demographic Subgroups
Raw Agricultural Commodity"
Alfalfa Sprouts
Apples-Dried
Apples-Fresh
Apples-Juice
Apricots-Dried
Apricots-Fresh
Artichokes-Globe
Artichokes-Jerusalem
Asparagus
Avocados
Bamboo Shoots
Bananas-Dried
Bananas-Fresh
B ananas- Umpeci fied
Bcans-Dry-Blackeye Peas (cowpeas)
Bcans-Dry-Broad Beans (Mature Seed)
Beans-Dry-Garbanzo (Chick Pea)
Beans-Dry-Great Northern
Beans-Dry-Hyacinth (Mature Seeds)
Beans-Dry-Kidney
Beans-Dry-Lima
Beans-Dry-Navy (Pea)
Beans-Dry-Other
Beans-Dry-Pigeon Beans
3eans-Dry-Pinto
Seans-Succulent-Broad Beans (Immature
Seed)
Beans-Succulent-Green
Bcans-Succulem-Hyacinth (Young Pods)
3cans-Succu!cnt-Lima
Beans-Succulent-Other
Jeans-Succulent-Yellow. Wax
Jeans-Unspecified
Average Consumption
(Grams/Kg Body Weight-Day)
0.0001393
0.0002064
0.4567290
0.2216490
0.0004040
0.0336893
0.0032120
0.0000010
0.0131098
0.0125370
0.0001464
0.0004489
0.2240382
0.0032970
0.0024735
0,0000000
0.0005258
0.00000 10
0.0000000
0.0136313
0.0079892
0.0374073
0.0398251
0.0000357
0.0363498
0.0000000
0.2000500
0.0000000
0.0256648
0.0263838
0.0054634
0.0052345
Standard Error
0.0000319
0.0000566
0.0142203
0.0142069
0.0001457
0.0022029
0.0007696
*
0.0010290
0.0020182
0.0000505
0.0001232
0.0088206
0.0004938
0.0005469
*
0.0001590
*
*
0.0045628
0.0016493
0.0023595
0.0023773
0.0000357
0.0048479
*
0.0062554
*
0.0021327
0.0042782
0.0009518
0.0012082
Page
9-22
Exposure Factors Handbook
_________ August 1996
-------
Volume //- Food Ingestion
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits
Factors
and Vegetables
Table 9-9. Mean Per Capita Intake Rates (as consumed) for Fruits and Vegetables Based on
Raw Agricultural Commodity-
Beets-Roots
Beets-Tops (Greens)
Bitter Melon
Blackberries
Blueberries
Boysenberries
Bread Nuts
Bread Fruit
Broccoli
Brussel Sprouts
Cabbage-Chinese/Celery, Inc. Bok Choy
Cabbage-Green and Red
Cactus Pads
Cantaloupes
Carambola
Carob
Carrots
Casabas
Cassava (Yuca Blanca)
Cauliflower
Celery
Cherimoya
Cherries-Dried
Cherries-Fresh
Cherries-Juice
Chicory (French or Belgian Endive)
Chili Peppers
Chives
Citrus Citron
Coconut-Copra
Coconut-Fresh
Coconut-Water
Average Consumption
0.0216142
0.0008287
0.0000232
0.0064268
0.0090474...
0.0007313
0.0000010
0.0000737
0.0491295
0.0068480
0.0045632
0.0936402
0.00000 10
0.0444220
0.0000010
0.0000913
0.1734794
0.0007703
0.0002095
0.0158368
0.060961 1
0.0000010
0.0000010
0.0321754
0.0034080
0.0006707
0.0000000
0.0000193
0.0001573
0.0012860
0.0001927
0.0000005
Hb
Standard Error .
0.0014187
0.0003755
0.0000233
0.0007316
0.0008951
0.0006284
#
0.0000590
0.0032966
0:0009061
0.0020966
0.0039046
*
0.0029515
*
0.0000474
0.0041640
0.0003057
0.00001574
0.0011522
0.0014495
*
*
0.0024966
0.0009078
0.0001465
*
0.0000070
0.0000324
0.0000927
0.0000684
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
-------
Volume II -Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-9. Mean Per Capita Intake Rates (as consumed) for Fruits and Vegetables Based on All Sex/ Age/Demographic Subgroups
Raw Agricultural Commodity"
Collards
Com. Pop
Corn. Sweet
Crabapplcs
Cranberries
Cranberries-Juice
Crenshaws
Cress. Upland
Cress. Garden. Field
Cucumbers
Currants
Dandelion
Daw*
Dewberries
Eggplant
Elderberries
Endive, Curley and Escarole
Fennel
Figs
Garlic
Gcnip (Spanish Lime)
Ginkgo Nuts
Gooseberries
Grapefruit-Juice
Grapefruit-Pulp
Grapes-Fresh
Grapes-Juice
Grapes-Leaves
Grapes-Raisins
Groundcherrics (Poha or Cape-
Uooscberrics)
Guava
rtonevdew Melons
Average Consumption
(Grams/Kg Body Weight-Day)
0.0188966
0.0067714
0.2367071
0.00037.40
0.0150137
0.0170794
0.0000010
0.0000010
0.0000000
0.0720821
0.0005462
0.0005039
0.0006662
p.0023430
0.0061858
0.0001364
0.0011851
0.0000000
0.0027847
0.0007621
0.0000010
0.0000010
0.0003953
0.0773585
0.0684644
0.0437931
0.0900960
0.0000119
0.0169730
0.0000000
0.0000945
0.0183628
Standard Error
0.0032628
0.0003348
0.0062226
*
0.0006153
0.0022223
*
*
*
0.0034389
0.0000892
0.0002225
0.0001498
#
0.0007645
0.0001365
0.0001929
*
0.0005254
0.0000230
*
*
0.0001341
0.0053846
0.0032321
0.0023071
0.0058627
0.0000887
0.0009221
*
0.0000558
0.0042879
Page
9-24
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-9. Mean Per Capita Intake Rates (as consumed) for Fruits and Vegetables Based on All Sex/ Age/Demographic Subgroups
Raw Agricultural Commodity"
Huckleberries (Gaylussacia)
Juneberry
Kale
Kiwi
Kohlrabi
Kumquats
Lambsquarter
Leafy Oriental Vegetables
Leeks
Lemons-Juice
Lemons- Peel
Lemons-Pulp
Lemons-Unspecified
Lenliles-Split
Lentiles- Whole
Lettuce-Head Varieties
Lettuce-Leafy Varieties
Lettuce-Unspecified
Limes-Juice
Limes-Pulp
Limes-Unspecified
Loganberries
Logan Fruit
Loquats
Lychee-Dried
Lychees (Litchi)
Maney (Mammee Apple)
Mangoes
Mulberries
Mung Beans (Sprouts)
Mushrooms
Mustard Greens
Average Consumption
(Grams/Kg Body Weight-Day)
0.0000010
0.0000010
0.0015036
0.0000191
0.0002357 .
0.0000798
0.0000481
0.0000010
0.0000388
0.0189564
0.0002570
0.0002149
0.0020695
0.0000079
0.0012022
0.2122803
0.0044328
0.0092008
0.0032895
0.0000941
0.0000010
0.0002040
0.0000010
0.0000000
0.0000010
0.0000010
0.0000010
0.0005539
0.0000010
0.0066521
0.0213881
0.0145284
Standard Error
*
*
0.0006070
0.0000191
0.0001028
0.0000574
0.0000481
*
0.0000221
0.0009004
0.0001082
0.0000378
0.0003048
0.0000064
0.0002351
0.0059226
0.0003840
0.0004328
0.0005473
0.0000344
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.0002121 :
1 *
0.0006462
0.0009651
0.0024053
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
9-25
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Veeetables
Table 9-9. Mean Per Capita Intake Rales {as consumed) for Fruits and Vegetables Based on
Raw Agricultural Commodity'
Xcciarincs
Okra
Olive*
Onions-Dehydrated or Dried
Onkms-Dry-Bulb (Cipollini)
Onions-Green
Oranges-Juice
Oranges-Peel
Oranges-Pulp
Papayas-Dried
Papayas-Fresh
Papayas-Juice
Parsley Roots
Parsley
Parsnips
Passion Fruit (Granadilla)
Pawpaws
Peaches- Dried
Peaches-Fresh
Pears-Dried
Pears-Fresh
Peas (Garden)-Green Immature
Peas (GanJcn)-Maturc Seeds, Dry
Peppers, Sweet, Garden
Peppers-Oilier
Persimmons
Persian Melons
Pimentos
Pineapple-Dried
Pineapple-Fresh, Pulp
Pineapple-Fresh, Juice
Pitanna (Surinam Chcrrv)
Average Consumption
(Grams/Kg Body Weight-Day)
0.0129663
0.0146352
0.0031757
0.0001192
0.1060612
0.0019556
1.0947265
0.0001358
0.1503524
0.0009598
' 0.0013389
0.0030536
0.0000010
0.0036679
0.0006974
0.0000010
0.0000010
0.0000496
0.2153916
0.0000475
0.1224735
0.1719997
0.0017502
0.0215525
0.0043594
0.0004008
0.0000010
0.0019485
0.0000248
0.0308283
0.0371824
0.0000010 ;
0.0013460
0.0017782
0.0002457
0.0000456
0.0021564
0.0001848
0.0283937
0.0000085
0.0092049
0.0000520
0.0005055
0.0012795
*
0.0001459
0.0001746
*
*
0.0000152
0.0078691
0.0000279
0.0050442
0.0067868
0.0002004
0.0010091
0.0004748
0.0002236
*
0.0001482
0.0000195
0.0017136
0.0026438
*
Page
9-26
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chanter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-9. Mean Per Capita Intake Rates (as consumed) for Fruits and Vegetables Based on All Sex/Age/Demographic Subgroups
Plantains
Plums, Prune-Juice
Plums (Damsons)-Fresh
Plums-Prunes (Dried)
Poke Greens
Pomegranates
Potatoes (White)-Whole
Potatoes (White)-Unspecified
Potatoes (White)-Peeled
Potatoes (White)-Dry
Potatoes (White)-Peel Only
Pumpkin
Quinces
Radishes-Roots
Radishes-Tops
Raspberries
Rhubarb
Rutabagas-Roots
Rutabagas-Tops
Salsify (Oyster Plant)
Shallots
Soursop (Annona Muricata)
Soybeans-Sprouted Seeds
Spinach
Squash-Summer
Squash- Winter
Strawberries
Sugar Apples (Sweetsop)
Sweetpolatoes (including Yams)
Swiss Chard
Tangelos
Tangerine-Juice
Average Consumption
(Grams/Kg Body Weight-Day)
0,0016370
0.0137548
0.0248626
0.0058071
0.0002957
0.0000820
0.3400582
0.0000822
0.7842573
0.0012994
0.0000217
0.0044182
0.0001870
0.0015558
0.0000000
0.0028661
0.0037685
0.0027949
0.0000000
0.0000028
0.0000000
0.0000010
0.0000000
0.0435310
0.0316479
0.0324417
0.0347089
0.0000010
0.0388326
0.0016915
0.0025555
0.0000839
Standard Error
0.0007074
0.0017904
0.0020953
0.0005890
0.0001475
0.0000478
0.0102200
0.0000093
0.0184579
0.0001896
0.0000133
0.0004354
*
0.0001505
*
0,0005845
0.0006588
0.0009720
*
0.0000028
*
*
*
0.0030656
0.0022956
0.0026580
0.0020514
*
0.0035926
0.0004642
0.0006668
0.0000567
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
9-27
-------
Volume II'- Food Ihgestion Factors
....... Chapter, M- Intake of Fruits and,yegetables
Table 9-9. Mean Per Capita Intake Rates (as consumed) for Fruits and Vegetables Based pn All Sex/Age/Demographic Subgroups
Raw Agricultural Commodity1
Tangerines
Tapioca
Taro-Grecns
Taro-Root
Tomatoes-Catsup
Tomatoes-Juke
Tomatoes-Paste
Tomatoes-Puree
Tomatoes-Whole
Towelgourd
Turnips-Roots
Turnips-Tops
Water Chestnuts
Watercress
Watermelon
Yambcan, Tuber
Yaulia, Tannicr
Youngbcrries
Average Consumption
.(Grams/Kg Body Weight-Day) .
0.0688441
0.0012199
0.0000010
0.0000016
0.0420320
0.0551351
0.0394767
0.17012311
Ol'4920l84
0.0000010
0.0082392
0.0147111
0.0004060
0/0003553
0.0765054
0.0000422
0.0000856
0.0003570
. Standard Error
0.0010948
0.0000951
*
*
0.0015878
0.0029515
0.0012512
0.0054679
0.0080927
*
0.0014045
0.0025845
0.0000682
0.0001564
0.0068930
0.0000402
0.0000571
.... , *
* Not reported
' Consumed in any raw or prepared form
Source: DRES data base. ....... ......
Page
9-28
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-10. Mean Total Fruit Intake (as consumed) in a Day by Sex and Age (1977-1978)'
Age (yr)
Per Capita Intake
Percent of Population Using
Fruit in a Day
Intake (g/day) for Users Only'
Males and Females
1 and under
1-2
3-5
6-8
Males
9-11
12-14
15-18
19-22
23-34
35-50
51-64
65-74
75 and over
Females
9-11
12-14
15-18
19-22
23-34
35-50
51-64
65-74
75 and over
Males and Females
AH ages
169
146
134
152
133
120
147
107
141
115
171
174
186
148
120
126
133
122
133
171
179
189
142
86.8
62.9
56.1
60.1
50.5
51.2
47.0
39.4
46.4
44.0
62.4
62.2
62.6
59.7
48.7
49.9
48.0
47.7
52.8
66.7
69.3
64.7
54.2
196
231
239
253
263
236
313
271
305
262
275
281
197
247
247
251
278
255
252
256
259
292
263
1 Based on USDA Nationwide Food Consumption Survey (1977-1978) data for one day.
b Intake for users only was calculated by dividing the per capita intake rate by the fraction of the population using fruit in a day
Source: USDA. 1980. .
Table 9-11. Mean Total Fruit Intake (as consumed) in a Day by Sex and Age (1987-1988)'
Aee(vr)
Per Capita Intake (g/dav)
Percent of Population Using
Fruit in 1 Day
Intake (g/day) for Users Only*
Males and Females
5 and under
Males
' 6-11
12-19
20 and over
Females
6-11
12-19
20 and over
Males and Females
AH Ages
157
182
158
133
154
131
140
142
59.2
63.8
49.4
46.5
58.3
47.1
52.7
51.4
265
285
320
286
264
278
266
276
' Based on USDA Nationwide Food Consumption Survey (1987-1988) data for one day.
b Intake for users only was calculated by dividing the per capita intake rate by the fraction of the population using fruits in a dav
Source: USDA. 1992b:
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996 '
Page
9-29
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-12. Mean Total Vegetable Intake (as consumed) in a Day by Sex and Age (1977-1978)'
Age (yr)
Per Capita Intake
(g/day)
Percent of Population Using
Vegetables in a Day
Intake (g/day) for Users Onlyb
Males and Females
I and under
1-2
3-5
6-8
Males
9-11
12-14
15-18
19-22
21-34
35-50
51-64
65-74
75 and over
Females
9-11
12-14
15-18
19-22
23-34
35-50
51-64
65-74
75 & over
Males and Females
All Aecs
76
91
100
136
138
184
216
226
248
261
285
265
264
139
154
178
184
187
187
229
221
198
201
62.7
78.0
79.3
84.3
83.5
84.5
85.9
84.7
88.5
86.8
90.3
88.5
93.6
83.7
84.6
83.8
81.1
84.7
84.6
89.8
87.2
88.1
85.6
121
116
126
161
165
217
251
267
280
300
316
300
281
166
183
212
227
221
221
255
253
226
235
Based on USDA Nationwide Food Consumption Survey (1977-1978) data for one day.
* Intake for users only was calculated by dividing the per capita intake rate by the fraction of the population using vegetables in a day.
Source: USDA. 1980. _^_
Table 9-13. Mean Total Vegetable Intake (as consumed) in a Day by Sex and Age (1987-1988)'
Age
-------
Volume 11 - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-14. Mean and Standard Error for the Per Capita Daily Intake of
Food Class and Subclass by Region (g/day as consumed)
US population
Northeast
North Central
South
West
Total Produce
Leafy-
Exposed1'
Protected'
Other
Total Grain
Breads
Cereals
Other
282.6 + 3.5
39.2+0.8
86.0+1.5
150.4 + 2.3
7.0 ฑ0.3
200.0 + 3.0
147.3 +1,4
29.9 ฑ1.3
22.9 ฑ1.7
270.6 ฑ6.9
38.1 ฑ1.5
88.5 ฑ 3.0
137.2 ฑ4.5
6.9 ฑ0.6
203.5 ฑ 5.8
153.1 ฑ2.8
24.6 + 2.5
25.9 ฑ3.3
282.4+6.7
37.1 ฑ 1.5
87.8 ฑ2.9
150.1 ฑ4.3
7.3+0.5
192.8 ฑ5.6
150.9 ฑ2.7
28.7 ฑ2.4
13.3*3.2
280.7 ฑ5.6
38.4 ฑ1.2
76.9 ฑ 2.4
160.1 ฑ3.6
5.4 ฑ0.4
202.2 ฑ4.7
143.9 ฑ2.3
34.6 + 2.0
23.7 ฑ2.7
303.1 ฑ8.2
45.3 + 1.8
95.5 = 36
152.5 + 5.3
9.8 ฑ 0.7
202.6 ฑ6.9
139.5 + 3.3
30.9 + 3,0
32. i +4.0
Produce belonging to this category include: cabbage, cauliflower, broccoli, celery, lettuce, and spinach.
b Produce belonging to this category include: apples, pears, berries, cucumber, squash, grapes, peaches, apricots, plums, prunes, string beans,
pea pods, and tomatoes.
c Produce belonging to this category include: carrots, beets, turnips, parsnips, citrus fruits, sweet corn, legumes (peas, beans, etc.), melons,
onion, and potatoes. .
NOTE: Northeast = Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania.
North Central = Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska,
and Kansas.
South = Maryland, Delaware, District of Columbia, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida,
Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas, and Oklahoma.
West = Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, Washington, Oregon, and California.
Source: U.S. EPA, 1984b.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996 '
Page
9-31
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
e
g
1
u
ra
I"
&
a
*C
>>
ra
*H.
Q
u.
i
i
is
"5
i
1
S
1
UI
1
s
1
C2
S
S
3
s
e
o
5
o
1
u
1
ง
a
o
a.
1
0
"S
1
a.
1
U
1
CJ
a.
&
u
u
i
a.
ปฃ*
3
*-**
s
u
o /> rr TT TT vi^-oocvir^t~-r^-m
ON r** oo oC \d oo" o oo M- Tt ci
"^ QiJ ^ C*l f*l CO ^ V} C*l C*l CO
+I+1+1+I4I+I4I4I4)+H+I
C*l C^l ^? ^1 ^*i ^ "^ ^? ^^ ' ^1 ^H
r^yQTrtfvopoxoovo^c^
00
+1+I+I+1+I4I4I+I+I+1+I
S5"2wiSr5S2?
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-16. Consumption of Foods (g dry weight/day) for Different Age Groups and
Estimated Lifetime Average Daily Food Intakes for a US Citizen
(averaged across sex) Calculated from the FDA Diet Data
Age (in years)
(0-1) (1-5)
Potatoes 5.67 10.03
Leafy Veg. 0.84 0.49
Legume Veg. 3.81 4.56
Root Veg. 3.04 0.67
Garden fruits 0.66 1.67
Peanuts 0.34 2.21
Mushrooms 0.00 0.01
Veg. Oils 27.62 17.69
(6-13)
14.72
0.85
6.51
1.20
2.57
2.56
0.03
27.54
(14-19)
19.40
1.22
8.45
1.73
3.47
2.91
0.04
37.04
" The estimated lifetime dietary intakes were estimated by:
Estimated lifetime = IR(0-1 ) + 5vrs * IR (1 -5) + 8 vrs * IR (6-13) + 6 vrs *
where IR = the intake rate for a specific age group.
Source: U.S. EPA, 1989.
70 years
(20-44)
17.28
2.16
9.81
1.77
4.75
2.43
0.14
37.20
IR (14-19) + 25 vrs
(45-70)
14.79
2.65
9.50
1.64
4.86
1.91
0.06
27.84
* IR (20-44) + 25
15.60
1.97
8.75
1.60
4.15
2.25
0.08
31.24
vrs * IR (45-70)
Table 9-17. Mean Daily Intake of Foods (Grams) Based on the Nutrition Canada Dietary Survey'
Age (vrs)
Fruit and Vegetables Not
Sample Size Fruit Products Including Potatoes Potatoes
Nuts and
Legumes
Males and Females .
Mi
1-4
5-11
lies
12-19
20-39
40-64
65+
1031 258
1995 312
1070 237
999 244
1222 194
881 165
56
83
94
155
134
118
75
110
185
189
131
124
6
13
20
15
15
8
Females
12-19
20-39
40-64
65+
Pregnant Females
1 162 ' 237
1347 204
1500 239
818 208
769 301
97
134
136
103
156
' Report does not specify whether means were calculated per capita or for consumers only.
consumed intake rates for consumers only reported by USDA (1980).
Source: Canadian Department of National Health and Welfare nd
115
99
79
80
114
15
8
10
5
15
The reported values are consistent with the as
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996 ' '
Page
9-33
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 -Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
- Table 9- 1 8. Per Capita consumption of Fresh Fruits and Vegetables in 1 99 V
Fresh Fruits
Food Item
Cilni-.
Oranges (includes Temple oranges)
Tangerines and Tangelos
Lemons
Limes
Grapefruit
Total Fresh Citrus
Noncimis
Apples
Apricots
Avocados
Bananas
Cherries
Cranberries
Grapes
Kiwi Fruit
Mangoes
Peaches & Nectarines
Pears
Pineapple
Papayas
Plums and Prunes
Strawberries
Total Fresh Noncitrus
Total Fresh Fruits
Per Capita Consumption
Oz/day)"., ,. .
10.2
1.6
3.1
0.9
7.1
22.9
21.8
O.I
1.7
31.2
0.5
0.4
8.2
0.5
1.0
7.6
3.7
2.2
0.3
1.7
4.1
85.0
107.7
.,..., Fresh Vegetables
Food Item
Artichokes
Asparagus
Snap Beans
Broccoli
Brussel Sprouts
Cabbage
Carrots
Cauliflower
Celery
Sweet Corn
Cucumber
Eggplant
Escarole/Endive
Garlic
Head Lettuce
Onions
Bell Peppers
Radishes
Spinach
Tomatoes
Total Fresh Vegetables
' Based on retail-weight equivalent. Includes imports; excludes exports and foods grown in home gardens. Data
Per Capita Consumption
(g/day)b
0.62
0.75
1.4
3.5
0.4
9.5
9.0
2.2
7.8
6.6
5.2
0.5
0.3
1.6
30.2
18.4
5.8
0.6
0.9
16.3
126.1
for 1991 used.
k Original data were presented in lbs/yr, data were converted to g/day by multiplying by a factor of 454 g/lb and dividing by 365 days/yr.
Source: USDA, 1993b.
.ซ,-.,-... ...,,- . .. . .
_
Page
9-34
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-19. Mean Moisture Content of Selected Fruits, Vegetables, and Grains Expressed
As Percentages of Edible Portions
Food
~ruit .
Apples - dried
Apples -
Apples - juice
Applesauce
Apricots
Apricots - dried
Bananas
Blackberries
Blueberries
Boysenberries
Cantaloupes - unspecified
Casabas
Cherries - sweet
Crabapples
Cranberries
Cranberries - juice cocktail
Currants (red and white)
Elderberries
Grapefruit
Grapefruit - juice
Grapefruit - unspecified
Grapes- fresh
Grapes - juice
Grapes - raisins
rfoneydew melons
iCiwi fruit
[Cumquats
Lemons - juice
Lemons - peel
Lemons - pulp
Limes - juice
Limes - unspecified
Loganberries
Mulberries
Vectarines
Oranges - unspecified
Peaches
Pears - dried
Pears - fresh
Pineapple
Pineapple - juice
Plums
Quinces
Raspberries
Strawberries
Tangerine - juice
Tangerines
Watermelon
Vegetables
Alfalfa sprouts
Artichokes - globe & French
Artichokes - Jerusalem
Moisture Content
Raw
31.76
83.93*
86.35
31.09
74.26
85.64
84.61
85.90
89.78
91.00
80.76
78.94
86.54
85.00
83.95
79.80
90.89
90.00
90.89
81.30
84.12
15.42
89.66
83.05
81.70
90.73
81.60
88.98
90.21
88.26
84.61
87.68
86.28
86.75
87.66
26.69
83.81
86.50
83.80
86.57 .
91.57
88.90
87.60
91.51
91.14
84.38
78.01
(Percent)
Cooked
84.13*
84.46**
87.93
88.35*
86.62*
85.56*
86.59*
84.95*
90.10*
92.46*
92.52*
87.49*
64.44*
86.47*
83.51*
85.53
85.20
89.97*
87.00*
89.51*
86.50
Comments
sulfured; *without added sugar
*with skin; **without skin
canned or bottled
*unsweetened
*canned juice pack with skin
sulfured; *without added sugar
*frozen unsweetened
frozen unsweetened
*canned, juice pack
bottled
*eanned unsweetened
pink, red, white
American type (slip skin)
canned or bottled
seedless
*canned or bottled
*canned or bottled
all varieties
*canned juice pack
sulfured; *without added sugar
*canned juice pack
*canned juice pack
canned
*frozen unsweetened
*canned sweetened
*canned juice pack
boiled, drained
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
9-35
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake oฃ fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-19. Mean Moisture Content of Selected Fruits, Vegetables, and Grains Expressed
As Percentages of Edible Portions
Food
Asparagus
lamboo shoots
Jeans - dry
Jeans - dry - blackeyc peas (cowpeas)
Jeans - dry - hyacinth (mature seeds)
Jeans - dry - navy (pea)
Jeans - dry - pinto
Jeans lima
Jeans snap - Italian - green - yellow
Iccts
tccts - tops (greens)
Iroccoli
irusscl sprouts
Cabbage - Chinese/celery,
including bok choy
Cabbage - red
Cabbage - savoy
Carrots
Cassava (yucca blanca)
Cauliflower
Celcriac
Celery
Chili peppers
'Jhivtt
Colt slaw
Collards
Com - swccl
Cress - garden - field
Cress - garden
Cucumbers
dandelion - greens
eggplant
iixJivc
Garlic
Kale
Coldrabi
.ambsquancr
.cefcs
xrmils - whole
.ciiucc - iceberg
efluec - romaine
ung beans (sprouts)
ushrooms
ustard greens
era
fJlikjnS
Unions - dclrydratcd or dried
'arslcy
'arsley roots
'arsp.ips
"eas (garden) - mature seeds - dry
'cppers - sweet - garden
Penalties (white) - peeled
Moisture Content
Raw
92.25
91.00
66.80
87.87
79.15
81.30
70.24
90.27
87.32
92.15
90.69
86.00
95.32.
91.55
91.00
87.79
68.51
92.26
88.00
94.70
87.74
92.00
81.50
93.90
75.96
89.40
89.40
96.05
85.60
91.93
93.79
58.58
84.46
91.00
84.30
83.00
67.34
95.89
94.91
90.40
91.81
90.80
89.58
90.82
3.93
88.31
88.31
79.53
88.89
92.77
78.96
(Percent)
Cooked
92.04
95.92
71.80
86.90
76.02-
93.39
67.17
89.22
90.90
89.13
90.20
87.32
95.55
93.60
92.00
87.38
92.50
92.30
95.00
92.50*
95.72
69.57
92.50
92.50
89.80
91.77
91.20
90.30
88.90
90.80
68.70
93.39
91.08
94.46
89.91
92.24
77.72
88.91
94.70
75.42
Comments
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
*canned solids & liquid
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
stir-fried
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
baked
Page
9-36
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9- 19.
Mean Moisture Content of Selected Fruits, Vegetables,
and Grains Expressed
As Percentages of Edible Portions
Food
Potatoes (white) : whole
Pumpkin '
iladishes - roots
Rhubarb
Rutabagas - unspecified
Salsify : (oyster plant)
Shallots
Soybeans - sprouted seeds
Spinach
Squash - summer
Squash - winter
Sweetpotatoes (including yams)
Swiss chard
Tapioca - pearl
Taro - greens
Taro - root
Tomatoes - juice
Tomatoes - paste
Tomatoes - puree
Tomatoes - raw
Tomatoes - whole
Towelgourd
Turnips - roots
Turnips - tops
Water chestnuts
fambean - tuber
Grains
Sarley - pearled
Corn - grain - endosperm
Com- grain- bran
Millet
Dats
lice - rough - wliite
lye - rough
lye - flour - medium
Sorghum (including milo)
Wheat - rough - hard white
Wheat - germ
Wheat - bran
Wheat - flour - whole grain
Moisture Content
Raw
83,29
91.60
94.84
93.61
89.66
77.00
79.80
69.05
91.58
93.68
88.71
72.84
92.66
10.99
85.66
70.64
93.95
93.95
93.85
91.87
. 91.07
73.46
89.15
10.09
10.37
3.71
8.67
8.22
11.62
10.95
9.85
9.20
9.57
11.12
9.89
10.27
(Percent)
Cooked
71.20
93.69
67.79
90.10
81.00
79.45
91.21
93.70
89.01
71.85
92.65
92.15
63.80
93.90
74.06
87.26
92.40
84.29
93.60
93.20
87.93
68.80
71.41
68.72
Comments
baked
boiled, drained
frozen, cooked with added sugar
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
steamed
boiled, drained
all varieties; boiled, drained
all varieties; baked
baked in skin
boiled, drained
dry
steamed
canned
canned
canned
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
boiled, drained
crude
crude
crude
Source: USDA, 1979-1986.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
9-37
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 -Intake of Fruits a.nd Vegetables
.H
3
VJ
1
3
u
JB
S
o
ฃ
3
O3
ซซ
ฃ
o
fr
19
3
We 9-20.
C6
j
U.
ซ
]c
D
1
3
s of Data
E
.5
Ij,
>J 2
si
8.1
*? 3
!'!
>,
s
C/4
a
S
3
1 KEYST
O W
ll ,
^ "8 -3 'I
a s ง -i
> O tS ~ '
15< ฃ
- O.Q .f?
|1B 2g
ll ซ ^ 1
V 8 S o Q.
X ex. ro 01 .W ซ
S &ฃ S ป o
* O eo C oo t-
u. > o G ^
o g > 3> > -0
I'll i si
x5 .r; eo o CO c
15
s
o *o
5 1
>; g
3 u
DO !3
jj" B
"ob ub
I
>
'f 2
.5 eg
o "
.. ง> J2
i 1 -
St 81
8 S*
00 3$? rt^-^r^ wi " ^
5* "5?2 >J2*os o. TJ ci.
^gg.JQ.0^ ."ง ^- fe ^ Sj ง ^J,
S ' o S 1 & 8 i* i ซ ^ as,
3W =-ง0 ^w>S tง w "go ซSi
21 lit 111 1 1 it II
a
% ฃ -0 T3 -0
| 1 ง | 1 S
"3 o g <2 a '5
8 S 88 8 ^
ra ^ ra a a ง"
. ซrt . * . f . f . -
>ป >^ ' >ป >> >* >ป
"ob "Sb "So "ofa "ฃb 'Sb 'So
4i
*" "^ .
c/i **" s V) w S3*
^a^ , S 5 S ^"^
< "ง "? "ง 2 ^
Q>8^ J Sj^sS S
iii i i it till i iii
III |f || ij ' i! s||
*o O- W j C* -^, ^_ -^. ^. "p ex o o *t> ^ *5 *^ ^ 21
lltsl II I! ll'lll ll 151
u ^ป
ฃ 3 " "^
f -1| 1 iiง i
t 1 .1 i 1 lei .3 i
Ja C Ci " pi, Q. O V O. *"*
& o i2ซ (SJea^^'-S ฃ w.l
o ซ
S^J" ON
_Q TO S
11 S 22
C O\ ป
J3 "-* p . e_,
0\ Q^^H ^ ^ 5 5
"1 -i "s S Q "1 "1 ciซ c^
s 111 i 1 1 ฐ*i ^
< UZ^W P D D2D
Page
9-38
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-21. Summary of Recommended Values for Per Capita Intake of Fruits and Vegetables and Serving Size
Mean
95th Percentile
Multiple Percentiles
Study
Total Fruit Intake
3.4 g/kg-day
Total Vegetable Intake
4.3 g/kg-day
Individual Fruit and
Vegetables Intake
see Table 9-5
Serving Size
see Table 9-8
12 g/kg-day
10 g/kg-day
see Table 9-5
i-.
see Table 9-8
see Table 9-3
see Table 9-4
see Table 9-5
see Table 9-8
EPA Analysis of CSFII
1989-91 Data
EPA Analysis of CSFII
1989-91 Data
EPA Analysis of CSFII
1989-91 Data
Paoetal., 1982
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
9-39
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-22. Confidence in Fruit and Vegetable Intake Recommendations
Considerations
Rationale
Rating
Study Elements
Level of peer review
' Accessibility
Reproducibility
1 Focus on factor of interest
Data pertinent to U.S.
' Primary data
1 Currency
1 Adequacy of data collection
period
1 Validity of approach
' Study size
' Representativeness of the
population
Characterization of variability
Lack of bias in study design
(high rating is desirable)
Measurement error
Other Elements
Number of studies
Agreement between researchers
Overall Rating
USDACSFII survey receives high level of peer
review. EPA analysis of these data has not been
peer reviewed outside the Agency. (Peer review
will be conducted as part of the peer review of this
Handbook)
CSFII data is publicly available
Enough information is included to reproduce results
Analysis is specifically designed to address food
intake
Data focuses on the U.S. population
This is new analysis of primary data
Is the most current data publicly available
Survey is designed to collect short-term data.
Survey methodology was adequate
Study size was very large and therefore adequate
The population studied was the U.S. population.
Survey was not designed to capture long term day-
to-day variability. Short term distributions are
provided
Response rate was adequate?
No measurements were taken. The study relied on
survey data.
1; CSFII is the most recent data publicly available.
Therefore, it was the only study classified as key
study.
Although the CSFII was the only study classified as
key study, the results are in good agreement with
earlier data.
The survey is representative of U.S. population;
Although there was only one study considered key,
these data are the most recent and are in agreement
with earlier data; the approach used to analyzed the
data was adequate. However, due to the limitations
of the survey design estimation of long-term
percentile values (especially the upper percentiles)
is uncertain.
Medium (This will become a "high"
once the Handbook's peer review is
completed)
High
High
High
High
High
High
Medium confidence for average values;
Low confidence for long term percentile
distribution
High
High
High
Medium
Medium
N/A
Low
High
High confidence in the average;
Low confidence in the long-term upper
percentiles
Page
9-40
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Table 9-23. Confidence in Fruits and Vegetable Serving Size Recommendations
Considerations
Rationale
Rating
Study Elements
Level of peer review
Accessibility
Reproducibility
Focus on factor of interest
Data pertinent to U.S.
Primary data
Currency
Adequacy of data collection
period
Validity of approach
Study size
Representativeness of the
population
Characterization of variability
Lack of bias in study design
(high rating is desirable)
8 Measurement error
Other Elements
Number of studies
Agreement between researchers
Overall Rating
USDA NFCS survey receives high level of peer High
review.
The NFCS data are publicly available High
Methodology is clearly explained High
Analysis is specifically designed to address food High
intake
Data focuses on the U.S. population High
The study analyzed primary data High
The data are old (i.e., 1977-78) Low
Survey is designed to collect short-term data. Medium
Survey methodology was adequate High
Study size was very large and therefore adequate High
The population studied was the U.S. population. High
Survey was not designed to capture long term day- Medium
to-day variability. Short term distributions are
provided
Response rate was adequate Medium
No measurements were taken. The study relied on N/A
survey data.
1 Low
Although serving size data may have been collected Low
in other surveys, they have not been reported in any
other study.
The survey is representative of U.S. population; the Medium
approach used to analyzed the data was adequate.
However, due to the limitations of the survey
design estimation of long-term percentile values
(especially the upper percentiles) is uncertain.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996 '-
Page
9-41
-------
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
APPENDIX 9A
Calculations Used in the 1989/91 CSB1I Analysis to Correct for Mixtures
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
9A-1
-------
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
APPENDIX 9A
Calculations Used in the 1989/91 CSFII Analysis to Correct for Mixtures
Distributions of intake for various food groups were generated for the food/items groups using the USDA 1989/91
CSFII data set as described in Sections 9.2.2. and 11.1.2. However, several of the food categories used did not include
meats, dairy products, and vegetables that were eaten as mixtures with other foods. Thus, adjusted intake rates were
calculated for food items that were identified by USDA (1995) as comprising a significant portion of grain and meat
mixtures. To account for the amount of these foods consumed as mixtures, the mean fractions of total meat or grain
mixtures represented by these food items were calculated (Table 9A-1) using Appendix C of USDA (1995). Mean
values for all individuals were used to calculate these fractions. These fractions were multiplied by each individual's
intake rate for total meat mixtures or grain mixtures to calculate the amount of the individual's food mixture intake that
can be categorized into one of the selected food groups. These amounts were then added to the total intakes rates for
meats, grains, total vegetables, tomatoes, and white potatoes to calculate an individual's total intake of these food groups,
as shown in the example for meats below.
meat -adjusted
* t>r mixtures
* FRmeailKr) +
* ntt mixtures meat/mt' ^ meat'
where:
"Sncat-adjusted
"Snl
IRmea
Fr
rlm
Fr
rl meat/ml
adjusted individual intake rate for total meat;
individual intake rate for grain mixtures;
individual intake rate for meat mixtures;
individual intake rate for meats;
fraction of grain mixture that is meat; and
fraction of meat mixture that is meat.
Population distributions for mixture-adjusted intakes were based on adjusted intake rates for the population of interest.
Table 9A-1. Fraction of Grain and Meat Mixture Intake Represented by
Various Food Items/Groups
Grain Mixtures
total vegetables
tomatoes
white potatoes
total meats
beef
pork
poultry
dairy
total grains
Meat Mixtures
total vegetables
tomatoes
white potatoes
total meats
beef
pork
poultry
dairy
total grains
0.2360
0.1685
0.0000
0.0787
0.0449
0.0112
0.0112
0.1348
0.3146
0.2778
0.1111
0.0333
0.3556
0.2000
0.0222
0.0778
0.0556
0.1333
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
9A-3
-------
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
APPENDIX 9B
Food Codes and Definitions Used in Analysis
of the 1989/91 USDA CSFII Data
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
9B-1
-------
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Appendix 9B. Food Codes and Definitions Used in Analysis of the 1989/91 USDA CSFH Data
Food
Product
Food Codes
MAJOR FOOD GROUPS
Total Fruits
6-
Fruits
citrus fruits and juices
dried fruits
other fruits
fruits/juices & nectar
fruit/juices baby food
(includes baby foods)
Total
Vegetables
7- Vegetables (all forms)
white potatoes & PR starchy
dark green vegetables
deep yellow vegetables
tomatoes and torn, mixtures
other vegetables
veg. and mixtures/baby food
veg. with meat mixtures
411- Beans/legumes
412- Beans/legumes
413- Beans/legumes
(includes baby foods; mixtures, mostly vegetables; does not
include nuts and seeds)
Total Meats
20- Meat, type not specified
21- Beef
22- Pork
23- Lamb, veal, game, carcass meat
24- Poultry
25- Organ meats, sausages, lunchmeats, meat spreads
(excludes meat, poultry, and fish with non-meat items; frozen
plate meals; soups and gravies with meat, poultry and fish base;
and gelatin-based drinks; includes baby foods)
Total Dairy
Milk and Milk Products
milk and milk drinks
cream and cream substitutes
milk desserts, sauces, and gravies
cheeses
(includes regular fluid milk, human milk, imitation milk products,
yogurt, milk-based meal replacements, and infant formulas)
INDIVIDUAL FOODS
White
Potatoes
71-
White Potatoes and PR Starchy Veg.
baked, boiled, chips, sticks, creamed, scalloped, au gratin,
fried, mashed, stuffed, puffs, salad, recipes, soups, Puerto
Rican starchy vegetables
(does not include vegetables soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
Peppers
7512100 Pepper, hot chili, raw
7512200 Pepper, raw
7512210 Pepper, sweet green, raw
7512220 Pepper, sweet red, raw
7522600 Pepper, green, cooked, NS as to fat added
7522601 Pepper, green, cooked, fat not added
7522602 Pepper, green, cooked, fat added
7522604 Pepper, red, cooked, NS as to fat added
7522605 Pepper, red, cooked, fat not added
7522606 Pepper, red, cooked, fat added
7522609 Pepper, hot, cooked, NS as to fat added
7522610 Pepper, hot. cooked, fat not added
7522611 Pepper, hot, cooked, fat added
7551101 Peppers, hot, sauce
7551102 Peppers, pickled
7551105 Peppers, hot pickled
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
Onions
7510950 Chives, raw
7511150 Garlic, raw
7511250 Leek, raw
7511701 Onions, young green, raw
7511702 Onions, mature
7521550 Chives, dried
7521740 Garlic, cooked
7521840 Leek,cooked
7522100 Onions, mature cooked, NS as to fat added
7522101 Onions, mature cooked, fat not added
7522102 Onions, mature cooked, fat added
7522103 Onions, pearl cooked
7522104 Onions, young green cooked, NS as to fat
7522105 Onions, young green cooked, fat not added
7522106 Onions, young green cooked, fat added
7522110 Onion, dehydrated
7541501 Onions, creamed
7541502 Onion rings
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
9B-3
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Food
Product
Com
Apples
Tomatoes
Snap Beans
Beef
Food Codes
7510960 Corn, raw
7521600 Com, cooked, NS as to color/fat added
7521601 Com, cooked, NS as to color/fat not added
752 1 602 Corn, cooked. NS as to color/fat added
752 1 605 Com, cooked, NS as to color/cream style
7521 607 Corn, cooked, dried
7521610 Corn, cooked. yellow/NS as to fat added
752 1 6 1 1 Com, cooked, yellow/fat not added
7521612 Com, cooked, yellow/fat added
7521615 Com, yellow, cream style
7521616 Com, cooked, yell. & wh./NS as to fat
7521617 Com, cooked, yell. & wh./fat not added
7521618 Corn, cooked, yell. & wh./fal added
7521619 Corn, yellow, cream style, fat added
7521620 Com, cooked, white/NS as to fat added
62101 10 Apples, dried, uncooked
62101 15 Apples, dried, uncooked, low sodium
6210120 Apples, dried, cooked, NS as to sweetener
6210122 Apples, dried, cooked, unsweetened
6210123 Apples, dried, cooked, with sugar
6210130 Apple chips
6310100 Apples, raw
6310111 Applesauce, NS as to sweetener
6310112 Applesauce, unsweetened
63 1 0 1 1 3 Applesauce with sugar
63 1 0 1 1 4 Applesauce with low calorie sweetener
6310121 Apples, cooked or canned with syrup
6310131 Apple, baked NS as to sweetener
6310132 Apple, baked, unsweetened
74- Tomatoes and Tomato Mixtures
7510180 Beans, string, green, raw
7520498 Beans, string, cooked, NS color/fat added
7520499 Beans, string, cooked, NS color/no fat
7520500 Beans, string, cooked, NS color & fat
7520501 Beans, string, cooked, green/NS fat
7520502 Beans, string, cooked, green/no fat
7520503 Beans, string, cooked, green/fat
75205 1 1 Beans, str., canned, low sod.,green/NS fat
75205 1 2 Beans, str.. canned, low sod.,green/no fat
7520513 Beans, str., canned, low sod.,green/fat
7520600 Beans, string, cooked, yellow/NS fat
21- Beef
beef, nfs
beefsteak
beef oxtails, neckbones, ribs
roasts, stew meat, corned, brisket, sandwich steaks
ground beef, patties, meatballs
other beef items
752 1 62 1 Com, cooked, white/fat not added
752 1 622 Com, cooked, white/fat added
7521625 Corn, white, cream style
7521630 Com, yellow, canned, low sodium, NS fat
7521631 Com, yell., canned, low sod., fat not add
7521632 Com, yell., canned, low sod., fat added
752 1 749 Hominy, cooked
752175- Hominy, cooked
754 1101 Corn scalloped or pudding
7541102 Com fritter
7541103 Com with cream sauce
7550101 Corn relish
76405- Corn, baby
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures; includes baby food)
6310141 Apple rings, fried
6310142 Apple, pickled
6310150 Apple, fried
6340101 Apple, salad
6340106 Apple, candied
6410101 Apple cider
6410401 Applejuice
641 0405 Apple juice with vitamin C
6410409 Apple juice with calcium
6710200 Applesauce baby fd., NS as to str. or jr.
6710201 Applesauce baby food, strained
67 1 0202 Applesauce baby food, junior
6720200 Applejuice, baby food
(includes baby food; except mixtures)
7520602 Beans, string, cooked, yellow/fat
7540301 Beans, string, green, creamed
7540302 Beans, string, green, w/mushroom sauce
7540401 Beans, string, yellow, creamed
755001 1 Beans, string, green, pickled
7640100 Beans, green, string, baby
7640101 Beans, green, string, baby, str.
7640102 Beans, green, string, baby, junior
7640103 Beans, green, string, baby, creamed
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures; includes baby foods)
(excludes meat, poultry, and fish with non-meat items; frozen
plate meals; soups and gravies with meat, poultry and fish base;
and gelatin-based drinks; includes baby food)
Page
9B-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Food
Product
Pork
Game
Poultry
Eggs
Broccoli
Carrots
Pumpkin
Asparagus
Lima Beans
Cabbage
Lettuce
Food Codes
22- Pork
pork, nfs; ground dehydrated
chops
steaks, cutlets
ham
roasts
Canadian bacon
bacon, salt pork
other pork items
pork baby food
233- Game
24- Poultry
chicken
turkey
duck
other poultry
poultry baby food
3- Eggs
eggs
egg mixtures
egg substitutes
eggs baby food
froz. meals with egg as main ingred.
722- Broccoli (all forms)
7310- Carrots (all forms)
73 1 1 1 40 Carrots in Sauce
7311200 Carrot Chips
76201- Carrots, baby
732- Pumpkin (all forms)
733- Winter squash (all forms)
76205- Squash, baby
7510080 Asparagus, raw
75202- Asparagus, cooked
7540 1 0 1 Asparagus, creamed or with cheese
7510200 Lima Beans, raw
752040- Lima Beans, cooked
75204 1 - Lima Beans, canned
75402- Lima Beans with sauce
7510300 Cabbage, raw
7510400 Cabbage, Chinese, raw
75 10500 Cabbage, red, raw
75 1 4 1 00 Cabbage salad or coleslaw
75 1 4 1 30 Cabbage, Chinese, salad
75210- Chinese Cabbage, cooked
75211- . Green Cabbage, cooked
75113- 'Lettuce, raw
75143- Lettuce salad with other veg.
75 1 44 1 0 Lettuce, wilted, with bacon dressing
7522005 Lettuce, cooked
(excludes meat, poultry, and fish with non-meat items; frozen
plate meals; soups and gravies with meat, poultry and fish base;
and gelatin-based drinks; includes baby food)
(excludes meat, poultry, and fish with non-meat items; frozen
plate meals; soups and gravies with meat, poultry and fish base;
and gelatin-based drinks)
(excludes meat, poultry, and fish with non-meat items; frozen
plate meals; soups and gravies with meat, poultry and fish base;
and gelatin-based drinks; includes baby food)
(includes baby foods)
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures; includes baby foods except
mixtures)
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetables mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures; includes baby foods)
(does hot include vegetable soups; vegetables mixtures, or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures; does not include succotash)
75212- Red Cabbage, cooked
752 1 30- Savoy Cabbage, cooked
75230- Sauerkraut, cooked
7540701 Cabbage, creamed
755025- Cabbage, pickled or in relish
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
9B-5
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Food
Product
Okra
Peas
Cucumbers
llccls
Strawberries
Other Berries
Peaches
Pears
Food Codes
7522000
7522001
7522002
7522010
7512000
7512775
75223-
75224-
75225-
75231-
7541650
7511100
75142-
752167-
7550301
7550302
7550303
7550304
7510250
752080-
752081-
7540501
6322-
6413250
6320-
6321-
6341101
62116-
63135-
6412203
6420501
62119-
63137-
6341201
6421501
Okra. cooked, NS as to fat
Okra, cooked, fat not added
Okra, cooked, fat added
Lufla. cooked (Chinese Okra)
Peas, green, raw '
Snowpeas, raw
Peas, cowpeas, field or blackeye,
Peas, green, cooked
Peas, pigeon, cooked
Snowpeas, cooked
Pea salad ,
Cucumbers, raw
Cucumber salads
Cucumbers, cooked
Cucumber pickles, dill
Cucumber pickles, relish
Cucumber pickles, sour
Cucumber pickles, sweet .
Beets, raw
Beets, cooked
Beets, canned
Beets, harvard
Strawberries
Strawberry Juice
Other Berries
Other Berries
Cranberry salad
Dried Peaches
Peaches
Peach Juice
Peach Nectar
Dried Pears
Pears
Pear salad
Pear Nectar
7541450 Okra, fried
" 7550700 Okra. pickled
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
7541660 Pea salad with cheese
75417- Peas, with sauce or creamed
cooked 76409- Peas, baby
76411- Peas, creamed, baby
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures; includes baby foods except
mixtures)
7550305 Cucumber pickles, fresh
7550307 Cucumber, Kim Chee
75503 1 1 Cucumber pickles, dill, reduced salt
75503 14 Cucumber pickles, sweet, reduced salt
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
7550021 Beets, pickled
76403- Beets, baby
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures; includes baby foods except
mixtures)
(includes baby food; except mixtures)
6410460 Blackberry Juice
64 1 05- Cranberry Juice
(includes baby food; except mixtures)
67108- Peaches ,baby
6711450 Peaches, dry, baby
(includes baby food; except mixtures)
67109- Pears, baby
67 1 1 455 Pears, dry, baby
6721200 Pear juice, baby ...
(includes baby food; except mixtures)
Page
9B-6
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Food
Product
Food Codes
EXPOSED/PROTECTED jmJITS/VEGETABLES, ROOT VEGETABLES
Exposed 621011-
Fruits 621012-
6210130
62104-
62108-
62110-
62116-
62119-
62121-
62122-
62125-
63101-
63102-
63103-
631 li-
es 112-
63113-
63115-
63117-
63123-
6312601
63131-
63135-
63137-
63139-
Protected 61-
Fraits 62107-
62113-
62114-
62120-
62126-
63105-
63107-
63109-
63110-
63119-
63121-
63125-
6312650
6312651
6312660
63127-
63129-
63133-
63134-
63141-
Apple, dried
Apple, dried
Apple chips
Apricot, dried
Currants, dried
Date, dried
Peaches, dried
Pears, dried
Plum, dried
Prune, dried
Raisins
Apples/applesauce
Wi-apple
Apricots
Cherries, maraschino
Acerola
Cherries, sour
Cherries, sweet
Currants, raw
Grapes
Juneberry
Nectarine
Peach
Pear
Persimmons
Citrus Fr., Juices (incl. cit. juice mixtures)
Bananas, dried
Figs, dried
Lychees/Papayas, dried
Pineapple, dried
Tamarind, dried
Avocado, raw
Bananas
Cantaloupe, Carambola
Cassaba Melon
Figs
Genip
Guava/Jackfruit, raw
Kiwi
Lychee, raw
Lychee, cooked
Honeydew
Mango
Papaya
Passion Fruit
PineaDDle
63143- Plum
'63146- Quince
63 1 47- Rhubarb/Sapodillo
632- Berries
64101- Apple Cider
64104- Apple Juice
6410409 Apple juice with calcium
64105- Cranberry Juice
64116- Grape Juice
64122- Peach Juice
64132- Prune/Strawberry Juice
6420101 Apricot Nectar
64205- Peach Nectar
642 1 5- Pear Nectar .
67102- Applesauce, baby
67108- Peaches, baby
67109- Pears, baby
67 1 1 450 Peaches, baby, dry
6711455 Pears, baby, dry
67202- Apple Juice, baby
6720380 White Grape Juice, baby
67212- Pear Juice, baby
(includes baby foods/juices except mixtures; excludes
fruit mixtures)
63145- Pomegranate
63148- Sweetsop, Soursop, Tamarind
i 63149- Watermelon
64120- Papaya Juice
64 1 2 1 - Passion Fruit Juice
64124- Pineapple Juice
64 1 25- Pineapple juice
64133- Watermelon Juice
6420150 Banana Nectar
64202- Cantaloupe Nectar
64203- Guava Nectar
64204- Mango Nectar
64210- Papaya Nectar
642 1 3- Passion Fruit Nectar
6422 1 - Soursop Nectar
6710503 Bananas, baby
6711500 Bananas, baby, dry
6720500 Orange Juice, baby
672 1 300 Pineapple Juice, baby
(includes baby foods/juices except mixtures; excludes fruit
mixtures)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
9B-7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 -. Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Food
Product
Food Codes
Exposed
Veg,
721 Dark Green Leafy Veg. 752167-
722- Dark Green Nonleafy Veg. 752170-
74- Tomatoes and Tomato Mixtures 752171-
7510050 Alfalfa Sprouts 752172-
7510075 Artichoke, Jerusalem, raw 752173-
7510080 Asparagus, raw 7521801
75101- Beans, sprouts and green, raw 75219-
7510260 Broccoflower, raw 75220-
7510275 Brussel Sprouts, raw 7522116
7510280 Buckwheat Sprouts, raw 7522121
7510300 Cabbage, raw 75226-
7510400 Cabbage, Chinese, raw 75230-
7510500 Cabbage, Red, raw 75231-
7510700 Cauliflower, raw 75232-
7510900 Celery, raw 75233-
7510950 Chives, raw 7540050
7511100 Cucumber, raw 7540101
7511120 Eggplant, raw 75403-
7511200 Kohlrabi, raw 75404-
75113- Lettuce, raw 7540601
7511500 Mushrooms, raw 7540701
7511900 Parsley 75409-
7512100 Pepper, hot chili 75410-
75122- Peppers, raw 75412-
7512750 Seaweed, raw 75413-
7512775 Snowpeas, raw 75414-
75128- Summer Squash, raw 754180-
7513210 Celery Juice 7541822
7514100 Cabbage or cole slaw 7550011
7514130 Chinese Cabbage Salad 7550051
7514150 Celery with cheese 7550201
75142- Cucumber salads 755025-
75143- Lettuce salads . 7550301
7514410 Lettuce, wilted with bacon dressing 7550302
7514600 Greek salad 7550303
7514700 Spinach salad 7550304
7520060 Algae, dried 7550305
75201- Artichoke,cooked 7550307
75202- Asparagus, cooked 7550308
75203- Bamboo shoots, cooked 7550311
752049- Beans, string, cooked 7550314
75205- Beans, green, cooked/canned 7550500
75206- Beans, yellow, cooked/canned 7550700
75207- Bean Sprouts, cooked 75510-
752085- Breadfruit 7551101
752090- Brussel Sprouts, cooked 7551102
75210- Cabbage, Chinese, cooked 7551104
75211- Cabbage, green, cooked 7551301
75212- Cabbage, red, cooked 7553500
752130- Cabbage, savoy, cooked 76102-
75214- Cauliflower 76401-
75215- Celery. Chives. Christonhine (chavole)
Cucumber, cooked
Eggplant, cooked
Fern shoots
Fern shoots
Rowers of sesbania. squash or lily
Kohlrabi, cooked
Mushrooms, cooked
Okra/lettuce, cooked
Palm Hearts, cooked
Parsley, cooked
Peppers, pimento, cooked
Sauerkraut, cooked/canned
Snowpeas, cooked
Seaweed
Summer Squash
Artichokes, stuffed
Asparagus, creamed or with cheese
Beans, green with sauce
Beans, yellow with sauce
Brussel Sprouts, creamed
Cabbage, creamed
Cauliflower, creamed
Celery/Chiles, creamed
Eggplant, fried, with sauce, etc.
Kohlrabi, creamed
Mushrooms, Okra. fried, stuffed, creamed
Squash, baked, fried, creamed, etc.
Christophine, creamed
Beans, pickled
Celery, pickled
Cauliflower, pickled
Cabbage, pickled
Cucumber pickles, dill
Cucumber pickles, relish
Cucumber pickles, sour
Cucumber pickles, sweet
Cucumber pickles, fresh
Cucumber, Kim Chee
Eggplant, pickled
Cucumber pickles, dill, reduced salt
Cucumber pickles, sweet, reduced salt
Mushrooms, pickled
Okra, pickled
Olives
Peppers, hot
Peppers.pickled
Peppers, hot pickled
Seaweed, pickled
Zucchini, pickled
Dark Green Veg., baby
Beans, baby (excl. most soups &
mixtures)
Page
9B-8
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 - Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Food
Product
Protected
Veg.
Root
Vegetables
Feed Codes
732- Pumpkin
733- Winter Squash
7510200 Lima Beans, raw
7510550 Cactus, raw
7510960 Com, raw
7512000 Peas, raw
7520070 Aloe vera juice
752040- Lima Beans, cooked
752041- Lima Beans, canned
7520829 Bitter Melon
752083- Bitter Melon, cooked
7520950 Burdock
752131- Cactus
752160- Corn, cooked
752161- Corn, yellow, cooked
752162- Corn, white, cooked
752163- Corn, canned
7521749 Hominy
7 1 - White Potatoes and Puerto Rican St. Veg.
7310- Carrots
73 1 1 140 Carrots in sauce
7311200 Carrot chips
734- Sweetpotatoes
7510250 Beets, raw
7511150 Garlic, raw
7511180 Jicama (yambean), raw
7511250 Leeks, raw
75 1 1 7- Onions, raw
7512500 Radish, raw
7512700 Rutabaga, raw
7512900 Turnip, raw
752080- Beets, cooked
752081- Beets, canned
7521362 Cassava
7521740 Garlic, cooked
7521771 Horseradish
7521840 Leek. cooked
7521850 Lotus root
752210- Onions, cooked
752175- Hominy
75223- Peas, cowpeas, field or blackeye. cooked
75224- Peas, green, cooked
75225- Peas, pigeon, cooked
75301- Succotash
75402- Lima Beans with sauce
7541 1 - Com. scalloped, fritter, with cream
7541650 Pea salad
754 1 660 Pea salad with cheese
754 1 7- Peas, with sauce or creamed
7550101 Com relish
76205- Squash, yellow, baby
76405- Corn, baby
76409- Peas, baby
764 1 1 - Peas, creamed, baby
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
7522110 Onions, dehydrated
752220- Parsnips, cooked
75227- Radishes, cooked
75228- Rutabaga, cooked
75229- Salsify, cooked
75234- Turnip, cooked
75235- Water Chestnut
7540501 Beets, harvard
75415- - Onions, creamed, fried
7541601 Parsnips, creamed
754 1810 Turnips, creamed
755002 1 Beets, pickled
7550309 Horseradish
755 1 20 1 Radishes, pickled
7553403 Turnip, pickled
76201- Carrots, baby
76209- Sweetpotatoes, baby
76403- Beets, baby
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
USDA SUBCATEGORIES
Dark Green
Vegetables
Deep Yellow
Vegetables
Other
Vegetables
Citrus Fruits
72- Dark Green Vegetables
all forms
leafy, nonleafy, dk. gr. ve,ป. soups
73- Deep Yellow Vegetables
all forms
carrots, pumpkin, squash, Sweetpotatoes, dp. yell. veg.
soups
75- Other Vegetables
all forms
61- Citrus Fruits and Juices
6720500 Orange Juice, baby food
6720600 Oranee-ADricot Juice, babv food
6720700 Orange-Pineapple Juice, baby food
6721 100 Orange-Apple-Banana Juice, baby food
Exposure .Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
9B-9
-------
Voluitie II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 9 -Intake of Fruits and Vegetables
Food
Product
Other Fruils
Food Codes
62- Dried Fruits
63- Other Fruits
64- Fruit Juices and Nectars Excluding Citrus
671- Fruits, baby
67202- Apple Juice, baby
67203- Baby Juices .-
67204- Baby Juices
67212- Baby Juices
67213- Baby Juices
6725- Baby Juice
673- Baby Fruits
. 674- Baby Fruits
MIXTURES
Meal
Mixtures
Grain
Mixtures
27- Meat Mixtures
28-
58- Grain Mixtures
(includes frozen plate meals and soups)
(includes frozen plate meals and soups)
Page
9B-10
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
10. INTAKE OF FISH AND SHELLFISH
10.1. BACKGROUND
Contaminated finfish and shellfish are potential
sources of human exposure to toxic chemicals. Pollutants
are carried in the surface waters, but also may be stored
and accumulated in the sediments as a result of complex
physical and chemical processes. Consequently, finfish
and shellfish are exposed to these pollutants and may
become sources of contaminated food.
Accurately estimating exposure to a toxic chemical
among a population that consumes fish from a polluted
water body requires an estimation of intake rates of the
caught fish by both fishermen and their families.
Commercially caught fish are marketed widely, making
the prediction of an individual's consumption from a
particular commercial source difficult. Since the catch of
recreational and subsistence fishermen is not "diluted" in
this way, these individuals and their families represent the
population that is most vulnerable to exposure by intake of
contaminated fish from a specific location.
This section focuses on intake rates of fish. Note
that in this section the term fish refers to both finfish and
shellfish. The following subsections address intake rates
for the general population, and recreational and
subsistence fishermen. Data are presented for intake rates
for both marine and freshwater fish, when available. The
available studies have been classified as either key or
relevant based on the guidelines given in Volume I,
Section 1.3. Recommended intake rates are based on the
results of key studies, but other relevant studies are also
presented to provide the reader with added perspective on
the current state-of-knowledge pertaining to fish intake.
Survey data on fish consumption have been
collected using a number of different approaches which
need to be considered in interpreting the survey results.
Generally, surveys are either "creel" studies in which
fishermen are interviewed while fishing, or broader
population surveys using either mailed questionnaires or
phone interviews. Both types of data can be useful for
exposure assessment purposes, but somewhat different
applications and interpretations are needed. In fact, results
from creel studies have often been misinterpreted, due to
inadequate knowledge of survey principles. Below, some
basic facts about survey design are presented, followed by
an analysis of the differences between creel and population
based studies.
The typical survey seeks to draw inferences about
a larger population from a smaller sample of that
populatioa This larger population, from which the survey
sample is to be taken and to which the results of the
survey are to be generalized, is denoted the target
population of the survey. In order to generalize from the
sample to the target population, the probability of being
sampled must be known for each member of the target
population. This probability is reflected in weights
assigned to each survey respondent, with weights being
inversely proportional to sampling probability. When all
members of the target population have the same
probability of being sampled, all weights can be set to one
and essentially ignored.
In a mail or phone study of licensed anglers, the
target population is generally all licensed anglers in a
particular area, and in the studies presented, the sampling
probability is essentially equal for all target population
members. In a creel study, the target population is anyone
who fishes at the locations being studied; generally, in a
creel study, the probability of being sampled is not the
same for all members of the target population. For
instance, if the survey is conducted for one day at a site,
then it will include all persons who fish there daily but
only about 1/7 of the people who fish there weekly, l/30th
of the people who fish there monthly, etc. In this
example, the probability of being sampled (or inverse
weight) is seen to be proportional to the frequency of
fishing. However, if the survey involves interviewers
revisiting the same site on multiple days, and persons are
only interviewed once for the survey, then the probability
of being in the survey is not proportional to frequency; in
fact, it increases less than proportionally with frequency.
At the extreme of surveying the same site every day over
the survey period with no re-interviewing, all members of
the target population would have the same probability of
being sampled regardless of fishing frequency, implying
that the survey weights should all equal one.
On the other hand, if the survey protocol calls for
individuals to be interviewed each time an interviewer
encounters them (i.e., without regard to whether they
were previously interviewed), then the inverse weights
will again be proportional to fishing frequency, no matter
how many times interviewers revisit the same site. Note
that when individuals can be interviewed multiple times,
the results of each interview are included as separate
records in the data base and the survey weights should be
inversely proportional to the expected number of times
that an individual's interviews are included in the data
base.
In the published analyses of most creel studies,
there is no mention of sampling weights; by default all
weights are set to 1, implying equal probability of
sampling. However, since the sampling probabilities in a
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10-1
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
creel study, even with repeated interviewing at a site, are
highly dependent on fishing frequency, the fish intake
distributions reported for these surveys are not reflective
of the corresponding target populations. Instead, those
individuals with high fishing frequencies are given too big
a weight and the distribution is skewed to the right, i.e.,
it overestimates the target population distribution.
Price et. al. (1994) explained this problem and set
out to rectify it by adding weights to creel survey data; he
used data from two creel studies (Puffer et al., 1981 and
Pierce et al., 1981) as examples. Price et al. (1994) used
inverse fishing frequency as survey weights and produced
revised estimates of median and 95th percentile intake for
the above two studies. These revised estimates were
dramatically lower than the original estimates. The
approach of Price et al. (1994) is discussed in more detail
in Section 10.5 where the Puffer et. al. (1981) and Pierce
et al. (1981) studies are summarized.
When the correct weights are applied to survey data
the resulting percentiles reflect, on average, the
distribution in the target population; thus, for example, an
estimated 90 percent of the target population will have
intake levels below me 90th percentile of the survey fish
intake distribution. There is another way, however, of
characterizing distributions in addition to the standard
percentile approach; this approach is reflected in
statements of the form "50 percent of the income is
received by, for example, the top 10 percent of the
population, which consists of individuals making more
than 5100,000", for example. Note that the 50th
percentile (median) of the income distribution is well
below S100.000. Here the $100,000 level can be thought
of as, not the 50th percentile of the population income
distribution, but as the 50th percentile of the "resource
utilization distribution" (see Appendix 10A for technical
discussion of this distribution). Other percentiles of the
resource utilization distribution have similar interpreta-
tions; e.g., the 90th percentile of the resource utilization
distribution (for income) would be that level of income
such that 90 percent of total income is received by
individuals with incomes below this level and 10 percent
by individuals with income above this level. This
alternative approach to characterizing distributions is of
particular interest when a relatively small fraction of
individuals consumes a relatively large fraction of a
resource, which is the case with regards to recreational
fish consumption. In the studies of recreational anglers,
this alternative approach based on resource utilization will
be presented, where possible, in addition to the primary
approach of presenting the standard percentiles of the fish
intake distribution.
It has been determined that the resource utilization
approach to characterizing distributions has relevance to
the interpretation of creel survey data. As mentioned
above, most published analyses of creel surveys do not
employ weights reflective of sampling probability, but
instead give each respondent equal weight. For
mathematical reasons that are explained in Appendix 10A,
when creel analyses are performed in this (equal
weighting) manner, the calculated percentiles of the fish
intake distribution do not reflect the percentiles of the
target population fish intake distribution but instead reflect
(approximately) the percentiles of the "resource utilization
distribution". Thus, one would not expect 50 percent of
the target population to be consuming above the median
intake level as reported from such a creel survey, but
instead would expect that 50 percent of the total
recreational fish consumption would be individuals
consuming above this level. As with the example above,
and in accordance with the statement above that creel
surveys analyzed in this manner overestimate intake
distributions, the actual median level of intake in the target
population will be less (probably considerably so) than this
level and, accordingly, (considerably) less than 50 percent
of the target population will be consuming at or above this
level. These considerations are discussed when the results
of individual creel surveys are presented in later sections
and should be kept in mind whenever estimates based on
creel survey data are utilized.
The U.S. EPA has prepared a review of and an
evaluation of five different survey methods used for
obtaining fish consumption data. They are:
Recall-Telephone Survey;
Recall-Mail Survey;
Recall-Personal Interview;
Diary; and
Creel Census.
The reader is referred to U.S. EPA 1992-Consumption
Surveys for Fish and Shellfish for more detail on these
survey methods and their advantages and limitations.
10.2. KEY GENERAL POPULATION STUDIES
Tuna Research Institute Survey - The Tuna
Research Institute (TRI) funded a study of fish
consumption which was performed by the National
Purchase Diary (NPD) during the period of September,
1973 to August, 1974. The data tapes from this survey
Page
10-2
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
were obtained by the National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS), which later, along with the FDA, USDA and
TRI, conducted an intensive effort to identify and correct
errors in the data base. Javitz (1980) summarized the TRI
survey methodology and used die corrected tape to
generate fish intake distributions for various sub-
populations.
The TRI survey sample included 6,980 families
who were currently participating in a syndicated national
purchase diary panel, 2,400 additional families where the
head of household was female and under 35 years old; and
210 additional black families (Javitz, 1980). Of the 9,590
families in the total sample, 7,662 families (25,162
individuals) completed the questionnaire, a response rate
of 80 percent. The survey was weighted to represent the
U.S. population based on a number of census-defined
controls (i.e., census region, household size, income,
presence of children, race and age). The calculations of
means, percentiles, etc. were performed on a weighted
basis with each person contributing in proportion to
his/her assigned survey weight.
The survey population was divided into 12 different
sample segments and, for each of the 12 survey months,
data were collected from a different segment. Each survey
household was given a diary in which they recorded, over
a one month period, the date of any fish meals consumed
and the following accompanying information: the species
of fish consumed, whether the fish was commercially or
recreationally caught, the way the fish was packaged
(canned, frozen fresh, dried, smoked), the amount of fish
prepared and consumed, and the number of servings
consumed by household members and guests. Both meals
eaten at home and away from home were recorded. The
amount of fish prepared was determined as follows
(Javitz, 1980): "For fresh fish, the weight was recorded
in ounces and may have included the weight of the head
and tail. For frozen fish, the weight was recorded in
packaged ounces, and it was noted whether the fish was
breaded or combined with other ingredients (e.g., TV
dinners). For canned fish, the weight was recorded in
packaged ounces and it was noted whether the fish was
canned in water, oil, or with other ingredients (e.g.,
soups)".
Javitz (1980) reported that the corrected survey
tapes contained data on 24,652 individuals who consumed
fish in the survey month and that tabulations performed by
NPD indicated that these fish consumers represented 94
percent of the U.S. population. For this population of
"fish consumers", Javitz (1980) calculated means and
percentiles of fish consumption by demographic variables
(age, sex, race, census region and community type) and
overall (Tables 10-1 through 10-4). The overall mean fish
intake rate among fish consumers was calculated at 14.3
g/day and the 95th percentile at, 41.7 g/day.
Table 10-1. Total Fish Consumption by
Demographic Variables'
Demographic Category
Intake (a/person/day)
Mean 95th Percentile
Census Region
New England
Middle Atlantic
East North Central
West North Central
South Atlantic
East South Central
West Sonth Central
Mountain
Pacific
Community Type
Rural. non-SMSA
Central city, 2M or more
Outside central city. 2M or more
Central city, 1M - 2M
Outside central city. 1M - 2M
Central city. 500K - 1M
Outside central city. 500K - 1M
Outside central city. 250K - 500K
Central city. 250K - 500K
Central city. 50K - 250K
Outside central city, SOK - 250K
Other urban
14.2
16.0
21.0
13.2
13.2
15.6
6.2
10.1
14.5
15.8
17.4
20.9
21.7
13.3
16.3
16.2
12.9
12.0
15.2
13.0
14.4
12.1
14.2
13.0
19.0
15.9
15.4
14.5
14.2
14.0
12.2
14.1
13.8
11.3
13.5
41.2
45.2
67.3
29.4
38.4
44.8
16.5
26.8
38.3
42.9
48.1
53.4
55.4
39.8
46.5
47.8
36.9
35.2
44.1
38.4
43.6
32.1
39.6
38.3
' 55.6
47.3
41.7
41.5
41.0
39.7
32.1
40.5
43.4
31.'7
39.2
' The calculations in this table are based on respondents who
consumed fish during the survey month. These respondents are
estimated to represent 94 percent of the U.S. population. .
Source: Javitz. 1980.
As seen in Table 10-1, the mean and 95th percentile
of fish consumption were higher for Asian-Americans as
compared to the other racial groups. Other differences in
intake rates are those between gender and age groups.
While males (15.6 g/d) eat slightly more fish than females
(13.2 g/d), and adults eat more fish .than children, the
corresponding differences in body weight would probably
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10-3
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
compensate for the different intake rates in exposure
calculations (Javitz, 1980). There appeared to be no large
differences in regional intake rates, although higher rates
are shown in the New England and Middle Atlantic census
regions.
The mean and 95th percentile intake rates by age-
gender groups are presented in Table 10-2. Tables 10-3
and 10-4 present the distribution of fish consumption for
females and males, respectively, by age; these tables give
the percentages of females/males in a given age bracket
with intake rates within various ranges. Table 10-5
presents mean total fish consumption by fish species.
Table 10-2. Mean and 95th Percentile of Fish
Consumption (g/day) by Sex and Age*
Age (years)
Total Fish
Mean
95th Percentile
Female
Male
0-9
10- 19
20- 19
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-69
70+
0-9
10- 19
20- 19
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-69
70+
Overall
6.1
9.0
13.4
14.9
16.7
19.5
19.0
10.7
6.3
11.2
16.1
17.0
18.2
22.8
24.4
15.8
14.3
17.3
25.0
34.5
41.8
49.6
50.1
46.3
31.7
15.8
29.1
43.7
45.6
47.7
57.5
61.1
45.7
41.7
The calculations in this table are based upon respondents
wlio coasumcd fish in (lie month of the survey. These
respondents arc estimated to represent 94.0% of the U.S.
population.
Source; Javitz. 1980.
The TRI survey data were also utilized by Rupp et
al. (1980) to generate fish intake distributions for three
age groups (< 11, 12-18, and 19+ years) within each of
the 9 census regions and for the entire U.S. Separate
distributions were derived for freshwater finfish, saltwater
finfish and shellfish; thus a totai-of 90 (3*3*10) different
distributions were derived, each corresponding to intake
of a specific category of fish for a given age group within
a given region. The analysis of Rupp et al. (1980)
included only those respondents with known age. This
amounted to 23,213 respondents.
Ruffle et al. (1994) used the percentiles data of Rupp
et al. (1980) to estimate the best fitting lognormal
parameters for each distribution. Three methods (non-
linear optimization, first probability plot and second
probability plot) were used to estimate optimal
parameters. Ruffle et al. (1994) determined that, of the
three methods, the non-linear optimization method (NLO)
generally gave the best results. For some of the
distributions fitted by the NLO method, however, it was
determined that the lognormal model did not adequately fit
the empirical fish intake distribution. Ruffle et al. (1994)
used a criterion of minimum sum of squares (min SS) less
than 30 to identify which distributions provided adequate
fits. Of the 90 distributions studied, 77 were seen to have
min SS < 30; for these Ruffle et al. (1994) concluded
that the NLO modeled lognormal distributions are "well
suited for risk assessment". Of the remaining 13
distributions, 12 had min SS > 30; for these Ruffle at al.
(1994) concluded that modeled lognormal distributions
"may also be appropriate for use when exercised with due
care and with sensitivity analyses". One distribution, that
of freshwater finfish intake for children < 11 years of age
in New England, could not be modeled due to the absence
of any reported consumption.
Table 10-6 presents the optimal lognormal
parameters, the mean (u), standard deviation (s), and min
SS, for all 89 modeled distributions. These parameters can
be used to determine percentiles of the corresponding
distribution of average daily fish consumption rates
through the relation DFC(p)=expLu+ z(p)s] where
DFC(p) is the pth percentile of the distribution of average
daily fish consumption rates and z(p) is the z-score
associated with the pth percentile (e.g., z(50)=0). The
mean average daily fish consumption rate is given by
exp[ju + 0.5s2].
The analyses of Javitz (1980) and Ruffle et al.
(1994) were based on consumers only, who are estimated
to represent 94.0 percent of the U.S. population. U.S.
EPA estimated the mean intake in the general population
by multiplying the fraction consuming, 0.94, by the mean
among consumers reported by Javitz (1980) of 14.3 g/day;
the resulting estimate is 13.4 g/day. The 95th percentile
estimate of Javitz (1980) of 41.7 g/day among consumers
would be essentially unchanged when applied to the
general population; 41.7 g/day would represent the 95.3
percentile (i.e., 100*[0.95*0.94-t-0.06]) among the
general population.
Advantages of the TRI data survey are that it was a
large, nationally representative survey with a high
response rate (80 percent) and was conducted over an
entire year. In addition, consumption was recorded in a
Page
10-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
a
J.
1
&
^g
1
i
u.
i
s
1
g
g
(S
en
1
i
^
s
"0
i
o
s
Ml
rC
^
*!
ง
Si
i
i
s*
i ง
I? s
03
o
ง
to
a
5 S
O
ง
vi
o
~
o
o
0
vi
o
s
o
a
ง
ฃ
OOOซ-*C-1T'ICSซป-<
OOOOOOOOO
0^-OM---0-.<-4N
OOO'-'CS^MCS'-*'-'
OCIOiOVICNTrOOO
OOO^-co^fMO'-'
Mt-.fscoeo(M n-d-
oo'Hesrivivo <Tf
- ซ 0 ป 0. = 0, ซ V=
^S-^^^^^S^
OTtTtor-co-ocooo
S2S282S22
OOTfซ-*ปOC^'t'O*"*O
Scnc^rJcs^Sc^^
S5 ?5?) ?o
ฃ _
| ^SSSSRS+I
< 3ฃ33$ฃ3So
d
"ฃ<
1
w
s
^
a
a
g
1
0
o
a
1
S
I
I
|g
13
ง g
ซ y
a ^
ซง
ll
.3 B
'ง S"
i|
Jl
1 i
|l
t" ฐ
% Q
la
ง 5
.2 <3
J
S ^
O M
ง
Ml
f"1 o
*ea ti
8 G
. si
a
|.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
a
i
ฐ"
1
i
ft
$
*~*
0
S
i
i
o
s
-t
ซn
5
S
s-
1
a,
I 1
g a
o
s
o
>n
o
7
c
o
0
*"
o
5
o
a
ฃ
cJooooooปirjwi'^f
d C* fM CS CS '-"ซ-"
fj?ii2i2^i:^r*;^r
1 _
^ 2gig;fKS+!
< S^^^^-S^So
.2
I
CO
3
s
o
a
1
S"
*"
2
a
i
"tfl
ฃi
ซ
_
2 |
S >,
i ซ
||
1 1
- -s
1-1
II
>."a
i i
11
"i S
B 1.
1 1
If
ll
tn u
" w
i s
81
y,.s
fig
S .s ฃ
l-Ji
^ I"?
s {
- i5
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-5. Mean Total Fish Consumption by Species'
Species
Not reported
Abalone
Anchovies
Bass'
Blucfish
Blucgilisk
Bonito'
Buffaloflsh
Butterfish
Carp'
Catfish (Freshwater)'
Catfish (Marine)'
Clams'
Cod
Crab, King
Crab, oilier than King*
Grapple4
Croaker'
Dolphin1
Drums
Bounders*
Groupers
Haddock
Hake
Halibut*
Herring
Kingfish
Lobster (Northern)'
Lobster (Spiny)
Mackerel, Jack
Mackerel, other than Jack
Mean consumption
(g/day)
1.173
0.014
0.010
0.258
0.070
0.089
0.035
0.022
0.010
0.016
0.292
0.014
0.442
0.407
0.030
0.254
0.076
0.028
0.012
0.019
1.179
0.026
0.399
0.117
0.170
0.224
0.009
0.162
0.074
0.002
0.172
Species
Mullet*
Oysters'
Perch (Freshwater)*
Perch (Marine)
Pike (Marine)'
Pollock
Pompano
Rockfish
Sablefish
Salmon*
Scallops*
Scup*
Sharks
Shrimp*
Smelt*
Snapper
Snook*
Spot*
Squid and Octopi
Sunfish
Sword fish
Tilefish
Trout (Freshwater)*
Trout (Marine)*
Tuna, light
Tuna, White Albacore
Whitefish*
Other finfish*
Other shellfish*
Mean consumption
(g/day)
0.029
0.291
0.062
0.773
0.154
0.266
0.004
0.027
0.002
0.533
0.127
0.014
0.001
1.464
0.057
0.146
0.005
0.046
0.016
0.020
0.012
0.003
0.294
0.070
3.491
0.008
0.141
0.403
0.013
* The calculations in this table are based upon respondents who consumed fish during the month of the survey. These respondents are
estimated to represent 94.0% percent of the U.S. population.
' Designated as freshwater or estuarine species by Stephan (1980).
Source: Javitz, 1980.
Page
10-6
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and SL
Table 10-6. Best Fits of Lognnrmal Distributions Using the NonLinear Optimization (NLO) Method
Shellfish
o
(min SS)
Finfish (freshwater)
o
(min SS)
Finfish (saltwater)
o
(min SSI
Adults
1.370
0.858
27.57
0.334
1.183
6.45
2.311
0.72
30.13
The following equations may be used with the appropriate n
and percentiles of the DCR distribution.
DCR50 = exp C")
DCR90 = exp [^ + z(0.90) a]
DCR99 = exp [pi + z(0.99)
-------
1&
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
calculated by summing the amount of fish consumed by
the individual across the three reporting days for all fish-
related food codes in the given fish-by-habitat category
and then dividing by 3. Individual consumption per day
consuming fish (g/day) was calculated similarly except
that total fish consumption was divided by the number of
survey days the individual reported consuming fish; this
was calculated for fish consumers only (i.e., those
consuming fish on at least one of the three survey days).
The reported body-weight of the individual was used to
convert consumption in g/day to consumption in g/kg-day.
There were a total of 11,912 respondents in the
combined data set who had three-day dietary intake data.
A set of survey weights was assigned to this data set to
make it representative of the U.S. population with respect
to various demographic characteristics related to food
intake.
Analyses of fish intake were performed on an as-
eaten as well as on an uncooked equivalent basis and on a
g/day as well as g/kg-day basis." Table 10-7 gives mean
per-capita fish intake rates (g/day) based on uncooked
equivalent weight by habitat and fish type. The per capita
intake rate of finfish and shellfish from all habitats was
20.1 g/day. Per-capita consumption estimates by species,
as consumed, are shown in Appendix IOC. Table 10-8
displays the mean and various percentiles of the
distribution of total fish intake per day consuming fish, by
habitat. Also displayed is the percentage of the
population consuming fish of the specified habitat during
the three day survey period. Tables 10-9 and 10-10
present similar results as above but on a mg/kg-day basis;
Tables 10-11 and 10-12 present results in the same format
for fish intake (g/day) on an as-eaten (cooked) basis.
Table 10-7. Per Capita Mean Fish Consumption
Rates (g/day) By Habitat and Fish Type
(Uncooked Fish Weight)
Habitat
FrcsWEstuarinc
Marine
Toial
Source: t'.S. EPA
Finfish
Rate
(90% C.I.)
3.5
(2.9-4.1)
12.6
(11.6-13.6)
16.1
(15.0-17.2)
Shellfish
Rate
(90% C.I.)
3.2
(2.7-3.7)
0.8
(0.7-1.0)
4.0
(3.4-4.6)
Total
Rate
(90% C.I.)
6.6
(5.9-7.4)
13.5
(12.4-14.5)
20.1
O8.8-21.4)
Analysis of CSFII. 1989-1991
through use of the USDA recipe files, the analysis
identified all fish-related food codes and estimated the
percent fish content of each of these codes. By contrast,
some analyses of,the USDA National Food Coasumption
Surveys (NFCS's) which reported per capita fish intake
rates ( e.g., Pao et al., 1982; USDA, 1992a) excluded
certain fish containing foods (e.g., fish mixtures, frozen
plate meals) in their calculations.
Results from the 1977-1978 NFCS survey (Pao et
al., 1982) showed that only a small percentage of
consumers ate fish on more than one occasion per day.
This implies that the distribution presented for fish intake
per day consuming fish can be used as a surrogate for the
distribution of fish intake per (fish) eating occasion.
USDA Nationwide Food Consumption Survey 1977-
78 - The USDA 1977-78 Nationwide Food Consumption
Survey (NFCS) was described in Chapter 9. The survey
consisted of a household and individual component. For
the individual component, all members of surveyed
households were asked to provide 3 consecutive days of
dietary data. For the first day's data, participants supplied
dietary recall information to an in-home interviewer.
Second and third day dietary intakes were recorded by
participants. A total of 15,000 households were included
the 77-78 NFCS and about 38,000 individuals
m
was
The advantages of this study are its large size, its
relative currency and its representativeness. In addition,
completed the 3-day diet records. Fish intake
estimated based on consumption of fish products identified
in the NFCS data base according to NFCS-defined food
codes. These products included fresh, breaded, floured,
canned, raw and dried fish, but not fish mixtures or frozen
plate meals.
Pao et al. (1982) used the 1977-78 NCFS to
examine the quantity of fish consumed per eating
occasioa For each individual consuming fish in the 3 day
survey period, the quantity of fish consumed per eating
occasion was derived by dividing the total reported fish
intake over the 3 day period by the number of occasions
the individual reported eating fish. The distributions, by
age and sex, for the quantity of fish consumed per eating
occasion are displayed in Table 10-13 (Pao et al., 1982).
For the general population, the average quantity of fish
consumed per fish meal was 117 g, with a 95th percentile
of 284 g. Males in the age groups 19-34, 35-64 and 65-74
years had the highest average and 95th percentile
quantities among the age-sex groups presented.
Pao et al. (1982) also used the data from this
survey set to calculate per capita fish intake rates.
However, because these data are now almost 20 years out
of date, this analysis is not considered key with respect to
Page
10-8
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-8. Distribution of Fish Intake (grams) Per Day Consuming Fish, By Habitat
(Uncooked fish weight)
Habitat
Statistic
Estimate
90 Percent Confidence Interval
Fresh/Estuarine
Marine
All Fish
Mean
50th%
90th%
95tli%
99th%
Percent Consuming
Mean
50th%
90th%
95th%
99th%
Percent Consuming
Mean
50th%
90th%
95th%
99th%
Percent Consuming
95.3
56.4
240.5
325.1
501.7
18.5
112.8
93.3
222.7
267.7
415.1
28.9
129.0
101.9
249.1
326.0
497.5
37.0
87.2 - 103.5
50.8 - 65.1
223.4 - 266.8
297.0 - 328.7
472.7-591.5
107.4- 118.2
92.0 - 98.2
214.6 - 229.5
260.8 - 275.4
346.0 - 428.5
123.7 - 134.3
98.9 - 103.8
241.0-264.1
306.0 - 335.6
469.2 - 519.7
Note: Percentile confidence intervals estimated using the bootstrap method with 1,000.replications; percent consuming gives the percentage
of individuals consuming the specified category of fish during the 3-day survey period.
Source: U.S. EPA Analysis of CSFII. 1989-1991.
Table 10-9. Per Capita Fish Consumption Rates (milligrams/kg-day) By Habitat and Fish Type
(Uncooked Fish Weight)
Habitat
Fresh/Estuarine
Marine
Total
Source: U.S. EPA Analysis of CSFII.
Finfisn
Rate (90% C.I.)
58 (47-66)
217 (197-237)
274 (252-296)
1989-1991.
Shellfish
Rate (90% C.I.)
47 (39-54)
.14 (12-16)
60 (52-68)
Total
Rate (90% C.I.)
103(92-115)
230(211-251)
334(311-357)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10-9
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-10. Distribution of Fish Intake (milligrams/kg) Per Day Consuming Fish, By Habitat
(Uncooked Fish Weight)
Habitat
Statistic
Estimate
90 Percent Confidence Interval
F:rcsli'l:siuarinc
Marine
All Fish
Mean
50th%
90th%
95th%
99th%
Percent Consuming
Mean
50th%
90th%
95th%
99th%
Percent Consuming
Mean
50th%
90th%
95th%
99th%
Percent Consuming
1,492
910
3,837
4,793
8,332
18.5
1,937
1,505
3,699
5,055
8,508
28.9
2,145
1,663
4,224
5,478
9,172
37.0
1,363 - 1,622
834 - 979
3,502 - 3,954
4,646 - 5,200
7,137-8,921
1,835-2,039
1,450 - 1,566
3,585 - 4,022
4,873 - 5,267
7,848-9,139
2,056 - 2,235
1,611 - 1,721
4,086 - 4,454
5,163-4,686
8.605 - 0.707
Note: Perceratlc confidence intervals estimated using the bootstrap method with 1,000 replications; percent consuming gives the percentage
of individuals consuming the specified category of fish during the 3-day survey period.
Source: U.S. EPA Analysis of CSFII, 1989-1991. :
Table 10-11. Per Capita Fish Consumption Rates (g/day) By Habitat and Fish Type
(Cooked fish weight)
Habitat
Frcsh/Estua rinc
Marine
Total
Finfish
Rate (90% C.I.)
2.8 (2.3-3.2)
11.4(10.5-12.2)
14.1 (13.1-15.1) ,
Shellfish
Rate (90% C.I.)
2.8 (2.3-3.2)
0.8 (0.6-0.9)
3.5 (3.1-4.0)
Note: Perccntile confidence intervals estimates using the bootstrap method with 1,000 replications;
of individuals consuming the specified category of fish during the 3-day survey period.
Source: U.S. EPA Analysis of CSFII, 1989-1991.
Total
Rate (90% C.I.)
5.6 (4.9-6.2)
12.1 (11.2-13.0)
17.7(16.6-18.8)
percent consuming gives the percentage
Page
10-10
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-12. Distribution of Fish Intake (grams) Per Day Consuming Fish, By Habitat
(Cooked Fish Weight)
Habitat Statistic
Fresh/Estuarine Mean
50th%
90tli%
95th%
99th%
Marine
All Fish
Percent Consuming
Mean
50th%
90th%
95th%
99th%
Percent Consuming
Mean
50th%
90th%
95th%
99th%
Percent Consuming
Estimate
79.8
50.0
203.1
259.2
431.9
18.5
101.4
83.9
198.2
231.6
337.0
28.9
113.1
90.7
222.7
268.5
410.6
37.0
Note: Percentile confidence intervals estimated using the bootstrap method with 1 ,000 replications;
of individuals consuming the specified category of fish during the 3-day survey period.
Source:
U.S. EPA Analysis of CSFII, 1989-1991.
90 Percent Confidence Interval
.-'.' 73.2 - 86.4
43.9 - 54.3
192.6 - 222.8
241.0-266.8
379.8 - 518.4
96.7-106.1
78.4 - 87.4
191.7-205.5
226.5 - 242.7
313.8-377.1
108.7 - 127.5
88.4 -93.2
213.3 - 227.9
261.7-290.0
399.2 - 463.2
percent consuming gives the percentage
Table 10-13. Distribution of Quantity of Fish Consumed (in grams) Per Eating Occasion;
By Age and Sex
Percentiles
Aae (vears)-Sex Group
1-2 Male-Female
3-5 Male-Female
6-8 Male-Female
9-14 Male
9-14 Female
15-18 Male
15-18 Female
19-34 Male
19-34 Female
35-64 Male
35-64 Female
65-74 Male
65-74 I-'cinale
75+ Male
75+ Female
Overall
Mean
52
70
81
101
86
117
111
149
104
147
119
145
123
124
112
117
SD
38
51
58
78
62
115
102
125
74
116
98
109
87
68
69
98
5th
8
12
19
28
19
20
24
28
20
28
20
35
24
36
20
20
25th
28
36
40
56
45
57
56
64
57
80
57
75
61
80
61
57
50th
43
57
72
84
79
85
85
113
85
113
85
113
103
106
112
85
75th
58
85
112
113
112
142
130
196
135
180
152
180
168
170
151
152
90th
112
113
160
170
168
200
225
284
184
258
227
270
227
227
196
r>7
95th
125
170
170
255
206
252
270
362
227
360
280
392
304'
227
225
284
99th
168
240
288
425
288
454
568
643
394
577
480
480
448
336
360
456
Source: Paoet. al., 1982.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10-11
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
assessing per capita intake (the average quantity of fish
consumed per fish meal should be less subject to change
over time than is per capita intake). In addition, fish
mixtures and frozen plate meals were not included in the
calculation of fish intake. The per capita fish intake rate
reported by Pao et al. (1982) was 11.8 g/day. The 1977-
1978 NCFS was a large and well designed survey and the
data are representative of the U.S. population.
10.3. RELEVANT GENERAL POPULATION
STUDIES
National Human Activity Pattern Survey (NHAPS) -
Tsang and Klepeis (1996) - The U.S. EPA collected
information for the general population on the duration and
frequency of time spent in selected activities and time
spent in selected microenvironments via 24-hour diaries.
Over 9,000 individuals from 48 contiguous states
participated in NHAPS. Approximately 4,700 participants
also provided information on seafood consumption. The
survey was conducted between October 1992 and
September 1994. Data were collected on the (1) number
of people that ate seafood in the last month, (2) the
number of servings of seafood consumed, and (3) whether
the seafood consumed was caught or purchased (Tsang
and Klepeis, 1996). The participant responses were
weighted according to selected demographics such as age,
gender, and race to ensure that results were representative
of the U.S. populatioa Of those 4,700 respondents,
2,980 (59.6 percent) ate seafood (including shellfish, eels,
or squid) in the last month (Table 10-14). The number of
servings per month were categorized in ranges of 1-2, 3-
5, 6-10, 11-19, and 20+ servings per month (Table 10-
15). The highest percentage (35 percent) of respondent
population had an intake of 3-5 servings per month. Most
(92 percent) of the respondents purchased the seafood they
ate (Table 10-16).
Intake data were not provided in the survey.
However, intake of fish can be estimated using the
information on the number of servings of fish eaten from
this study and serving size data-from other studies. The
recommended mean value in this Handbook for fish
serving size is 123 g/day. Using this mean value for
serving size and assuming that the average individual eats
3-5 servings per month, the amount of seafood eaten per
month would range from 369 to 615 grams/month or 12.3
to 20.5 g/day for the highest percentage of the population.
These values are within the range of mean intake values
for total fish (20.1 g/day) calculated in the U.S. EPA
analysis of the USDA CSFII data. It should be noted that
an all inclusive description for seafood was not presented
in Tsang and Klepeis (1996). It is not known if processed
or canned seafood and seafood mixtures are included in
the seafood category.
The advantages of NHAPS is that the data were
collected for a large number of individuals and are
representative of the U.S. general population. However,
evaluation of seafood intake was not the primary purpose
of the study and the data do not reflect the actual amount
of seafood that was eaten. However, using the assumption
described above, the estimated seafood intake from this
study are comparable to those observed in the EPA CSFII
analysis.
USDA Nationwide Food Consumption Survey 1987-
88 The USDA 1987-88 Nationwide Food Consumption
Survey (NFCS) was described in Chapter 9. Briefly, the
survey consisted of a household and individual component.
The household component asked about household food
consumption over the past one week period. For the
individual component, each member of a surveyed
household was interviewed (in person) and asked to recall
all foods eaten the previous day; the information from this
interview made up the "one day data" for the survey. In
addition, members were instructed to fill out a detailed
dietary record for the day of the interview and the
following day. The data for this entire 3-day period made
up the "3-day diet records". A statistical sampling design
was used to ensure that all seasons, geographic regions of
the U.S., demographic, and socioeconomic groups were
represented. Sampling weights were used to match the
population distribution of 13 demographic characteristics
related to food intake (USDA, 1992a).
Total fish intake was estimated based on
consumption of fish products identified in the NFCS data
base according to NFCS-defined food codes. These
products included fresh, breaded, floured, canned, raw
and dried fish, but not fish mixtures or frozen plate meals.
A total of 4,500 households participated in the
survey; the household response rate was 38 percent. One
day data was obtained for 10,172 (81 percent) of the
12,522 individuals in participating households; 8,468 (68
percent) individuals completed 3-day diet records.
USDA (1992b) used the one day data to derive per
capita fish intake rate and intake rates for consumers of
total fish. These rates, calculated by sex and age group,
are shown in Table 10-17. Intake rates for consumers-
only were calculated by dividing the per capita intake rate
by the fraction of the population consuming fish in one
day.
The 1987-1988 NFCS was also utilized to estimate
consumption of home produced fish (as well as home
Page
10-12
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
TABLE 10-14. PERCENT
OF POPULATION
ALL
OVERALL
1:HALE
2: FEMALE
1:1-4
2:5-11
3:12-17
4:18-64
5:> 64
i:UHITE
2:BLACK
3: AS I AH
4:SOHE OTHERS
5:HISPANIC
6:NO
1:YES
8:DK
EMPLOYMENT
1:FULL TIME
2: PART TIME
3: MOT EMPLOYED
1:< HIGH SCHOOL
2:HIGH SCHOOL 6RAD
3:< COLLEGE
4: COLLEGE GRAB.
5:POST GRAD.
-- CENSUS REGION --
1:NORTHEAST
2:MIDUEST
3:SOUTH
4:UEST
DAY OF WEEK
1 : WEEKDAY
2:UEEKENO
1:UINTER
2:SPRING
3:SUHHER
4: FALL
O.-KO
1:YES
8:OK
0:NO
1:YES
8:DK
-- BROHCH/EHPHYS
0:NO
1:YES
8:DK
NOTE: . - HISSING DATA
Source: Tseng and Klepei
N
4663
2
21(53
2498
84
263
348
326
2972
670
60
3774
463
77
96
103
46
4243
348
26
958
2017
379
1309
1021
399
1253
895
6!iO
445
1048
10216
1601
978
3156
1507
1264
1181
1275
943
4287
341
35
4500
125
38
4424
203
16
; OK
s, 1996
DID
0:NO
RESPOND
N
1811
1
821
989
25
160
177
179
997
273
20
1475
156
21
39
100
10
1625
165
11
518
630
134
529
550
196
501
304
159
101
370
449
590
402
1254
557
462
469
506
374
1674
131
6
1750
56
5
1726
80
* DONT'
THAT ATE SEAFOOD (INCLUDING SHELLFISH, EELS, OR SQUID)
RES EAT SEAFOOD LAST MONTH
1:YES
RESPOND.
X
38.8
50.0
38.0
39.6
29.8
60.8
50.9
54.9
33.5
40.7
33.3
39.1
33.7
27.3
40.6
51.8
21.7
38.3
47.4
42.3
54.1
31.2
35.4
40.4
53.9
49.1
40.0
34.0
24.5
22.7
35.3
43.3
36.9
41.1
39.7
37.0
36.6
39.7
39.7
39.7
39.0
38.4
17.1
38.9
44.8
13.2
39.0
39.4
13.9
KNOW;
N
2780
1
1311
1468
42
102
166
137
1946
387
22
2249
304
56
56
93
17
2565
183
15
412
1366
236
766
434
198
739
584
484
341
655
575
989
561
1848
932
780
691
745
564
2563
207
10
2698
68
14
2648
121
11
X ซ
X
59.6
50.0
60.6
58.8
50.0
38.8
47.7
42.0
65.5
57.8
36.7
59.6
65.7
72.7
58.3
48.2
37.0
60.5
52.6
57.7
43.0
67.7
62.3
58.5
42.5
49.6
59.0
65.3
74.5
76.6
62.5
55.5
61.8
57.4
58.6
61.8
61.7
58.5
58.4
59.8
59.8
60.7
28.6
60.0
54.4
36.8
59.9
59.6
30.6
8:DK
RESPOND.
N
72
31*
41
17
1
5
10
29
10
18
50
3
i
19
53
28
21
9
14
37
5
13
7
3
23
12
22
15
54
18
22
21
24
50
19
52
19
50
20
ROW PERCENTAGE;
X
1.5
1.4'
1.6
20.2
0.4
1.4
3.1
1.0
1.5
30.0
1.3
0.6
1.0*
41.3
1.2
2.9
1.0
2.4
1.1
3.6
1.3
1.0
0.8
1.1
0.7
2.2
1.2
1.4
1.5
1.7
1.2
1.7
1.8
1.9
0.5
1.2
0.9
54.3
1.2
0.8
50.0
1.1
1.0
55.6
N = SAMPLE SIZE
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10-13
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
TABLE 10-15. NUHBER OF SERVINGS OF
SEAFOOD CONSUMED
* OF SERVINGS RES ATE SEADFOOO
OVERALL
... f!ฃUnฃB mm It
ucnllcK ---
1:KALE
2: FEMALE
9:REF
1:1-4
2:5-11
3:12-17
4:18-64
5:> 64
.ป>. DftPC ....
1:UHITE
2:BLACK
3:ASIAN
4: SOME OTHERS
5:HISPAHIC
9:REF
0:NO
1:YES
8:OK
9:REF
EMPLOYMENT
1:FULL TIKE
2:PART TIKE
3:NOT EMPLOYED
9:REF
EDUCATION
1:< HIGH SCHOOL
2:HIGH SCHOOL GRAD
3:< COLLEGE
4:COLLEGE GRAD.
S:POST GRAD.
CENSUS REGION
1:NORTHEAST
2:MIDUEST
3:SOUTH
4:UEST
DAY OF WEEK
1:UEEKDAY
2:UEEKEKO
1:UIHTER
2:SPRING
3: SUMMER
4:FALL
0:KO
1:YES
8:DK
0:NO
1:YES
8:DK
-- BRONCH/EMPHYS
0:KO
1:YES
8:DK
ALL
N
2780
1311
1468
1
42
102
166
137
1946
387
2249
304
56
56
93
22
2566
182
15
17
...
399
1366
236
766
13
...
434
198
739
584
484
341
..
655
575
989
561
---
1848
932
780
691
745
564
2563
207
10
2698
68
14
--
2648
121
11
NOTE: . ซ HISSING DATA; DK
Source: Tuns ซnd
1:1-2
RESPOND.
N
918
405
512
1
13
55
72
68
603
107
731
105
15
22
41
4
844
68
5
1
190
407
70
249
2
205
88
267
161
115
82
191
199
336
192
602
316
262
240
220
196
846
69
3
896
19
3
877
37
4
= DON'T
2:3-5
RESPOND.
N
990
458
532
16
29
57
54
679
155
818
103
17
18
25
9
922
52
8
8
140
466
95
285
4
149
62
266
219
183
111
241
221
339
189
661
329
284
244
249
213
917
71
2
960
27
3
940
47
3
KNOW; X
3:6-10
RESPOND.
N
519
261
258
5
12
21
9
408
64
428
56
11
6
14
4
480
34
2
3
40
307
46
124
2
47
20
119
122
121
90
137
102
175
105
346
173
131
123
160
105
475
42
2
509
8
2
495
23
1
4:11-19
RESPOND.
N
191
101
90
4
2
6
2
145
32
155
16
5
5
9
1
175
15
1
11
107
14
57
2
12
6
46
48
43
36
62
17
70
42
129
62
60
45
59
27
180
11
183
7
1
185
6
* ROW PERCENTAGE;
5:20+ 8
:DK
RESPOND. RESPOND.
N
98
57
41
1
.
4
1
79
13
76
10
' 5
3
2
2
88
8
.
2
5
57
8
26
2
7
10
21
26
17
17
12
22
41
23
70
28
28
25
31
14
88
9
1
95
1
2
91
6
1
N * SAMPLE
N
64
29
35
-
3
4
6
3
32
16
41
14
3
2
2
2
57
5
.
2
13
22
3
25
1
14
12
20
8
5
5
12
14
28
10
40
24
15
14
26
9
57
5
2
55
6
3
60
2
2
SIZE
Klepeis, 1996.
Page
10-14
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
TABLE 10-16
FREQUENCY OF
SEAFOOD
THAT WAS
OR CAUGHT BY SOMEONE THEY
WAS SEAFOOD PURCHASED OR
ALL
OVERALL
1:HALE
Z: FEMALE
9:REF
1:1-4
2:5-11
3s 12- 17
4:18-64
5:> 64
1:UHITE
2:BLACK
3:ASIAN
4: SOME OTHERS
5:HISPANIC
9:REF
0:NO
1:YES
8:DK
9:REF
--- EMPLOYMENT
1:FULL TIME
2: PART TIME
3: NOT EMPLOYED
9:REF
EDUCATION
1:< HIGH SCHOOL
2: HIGH SCHOOL GRAD
3:< COLLEGE
A: COLLEGE GRAD.
5: POST GRAD.
-- CENSUS REGION --
1:NORTHEAST
2:MIDWEST
3:SOUTH
4:WEST
--- DAY OF WEEK ---
1 : WEEKDAY
2:WEEKEND
1:UINTER
2:SPRING
3: SUMMER
4: FALL
0:NO
1:YES
8:DK
0:NO
1:YES
8:DK
-- BRONCH/EMPHYS
0:NO
1:YES
8:DK
NOTE: . = MISSING DATA;
Source: Tsang and Kiepeis
N
2780
1311
146B
1
42
102
166
137
1946
387
2249
304
56
56
93
22
2566
182
15
17
399
1366
236
766
13
434
198
739
584
484
341
655
575
989
561
1848
932
780
691
745
564
2563
207
10
2698
68
14
2648
121
11
OK
, 1996
.
RESPOND.
N
3
1
2
-
.
f
.
3
1
1
.
i
2
1
2
1
f
.
B
2
f
1
2
i
.
2
1
.
2
1
2
1
.
3
_
t
3
.
= DON'T
1 :MOSTLY
PURCHAS-
ED
RESPOND.
N
2584
1206
1377
1
39
94
153
129
1810
359
2092
280
50
55
86
21
2387
169
12
16
368
1285
217
701
13
401
174
680
547
460
322
627
547
897
513
1724
860
741
655
674
514
2384
190
10
2507
63
14
2457
116
11
KNOW; X
2:MOSTLY
CAUGHT
RESPOND.
N
154
85
69
3
8
9
6
106
22
124
19
4
7
140
13
1
.
25
64
15
50
.
26
20
48
28
19
13
21
20
73
40
100
54
35
27
54
38
142
12
151
3
.
149
5
CONSUMED BEING PURCHASED
KNEW
CAUGHT
8:OK
RESPOND.
N
39
19
20
4
2
27
6
32
4
2
1
.
37
m
2
.
6
15
3
15
.
7
4
11
7
5
5
5
8
18
8
22
17
4
9
15
11
35
. 4
37
2
.
39
.
= ROW PERCENTAGE; N = SAMPLE SIZE
Exposure Factors Handbook
August1996
Page
10-15
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-17. Mean Fish Intake in a Day, by Sex and Age'
Sex
Age (year)
Per capita intake
(g/day)
Percent of population consuming
fish in 1 day
Mean intake (g/day) for
consumers onlyb
Males or Females
5 ami under
Males
6-11
12-19
20 and over
Females
6-11
12-19
20 and over
All individuals
3
3
15
7
9
12
11
6.0
3.7
2.2
10.9
7.1
9.0
10.9
9.4
67
79
136
138
99
100
110
117
* Based on USDA Nationwide Food Consumption Survey 1987-88 data for one day.
1 Intake for users only was calculated by dividing the per capita consumption rate by the fraction of the population consuming fish in one
day.
Source; USDA, 1992b.
produced fruits, vegetables, meats and dairy products) in
the general U.S. population. The methodology for
estimating home-produced intake rates was rather complex
and involved combining the household and individual
components of the MFCS; the methodology, as well as the
estimated intake rates, are described in detail in Chapter
12. However, since much of the rest of this chapter is
concerned with estimating consumption of recreationally
caught, i.e., home produced fish, the methods and results
of Chapter 12, as they pertain to fish consumption, are
summarized briefly here.
A total of 2.1 percent of the survey population
reported home produced fish consumption during the
survey week. Among consumers, the mean intake rate was
2.07 g/kg-day and the 95th percentile was 7.83 g/kg-day;
the per-capita intake rate was 0.04 g/kg-day. Note that
intake rates for home-produced foods were indexed to the
weight of the survey respondent and reported in g/kg-day.
It is possible to compare the estimates of home-
produced fish consumption derived in this analyses with
estimates derived from studies of recreational anglers
(described in Sections 10.4-10.8); however, the intake
rates must be put into a similar context. The home-
produced intake rates described refer to average daily
intake rates among individuals consuming home-produced
fish in a week; results from recreational angler studies,
however, usually report average daily rates for those
eating home-produced fish (or for those who recreationally
fish) at least some time during the year. Since many of
these latter individuals eat home-produced fish at a
frequency of less than once per week, the average daily
intake in this group would be expected to be less than that
reported.
The NFCS household component contains the
question "Does anyone in your household fish?". For the
population answering yes to this question (21 percent of
households), the NFCS data show that 9 percent consumed
home-produced fish in the week of the survey; the mean
intake rate for these consumers from fishing households
was 2.2 g/kg-day. (Note that 91 percent of individuals
reporting home grown fish consumption for the week of
the survey indicated that a household member fishes; the
overall mean intake rate among home-produced fish
consumers, regardless of fishing status, was the above
reported 2.07 g/kg-day). The per capita intake rate
among those living in a fishing household is then
calculated as 0.2 g/kg-day (2.2 * 0.09). Using the
estimated average weight of survey participants of 59 kg,
this translates into 11.8 g/day. Among members of
fishing households, home-produced fish consumption
accounted for 32.5 percent of total fish consumption.
As discussed in Chapter 12 of this volume, intake
rates for home-produced foods, including fish, are based
on the results of the household survey, and as such, reflect
the weight of fish taken into the household. In most of the
recreational fish surveys discussed later in this section, the
Page
10-16
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
weight of the fish catch (which generally corresponds to
the weight taken into the household) is multiplied by an
edible fraction to convert to an uncooked equivalent of the
amount consumed. This fraction may be species specific,
but some studies used an average value; these average
values ranged from 0.3 to 0.5. Using a factor of 0.5
would convert the above 11.8 g/day rate to 5.9 g/day.
This estimate, 5.9 g/day, of the per-capita fish intake rate
among members of fishing households is within the range
of the per-capita intake rates among recreational anglers
addressed in sections to follow.
An advantage of analyses based on the 1987-1988
USDA NFCS is that the data set is a large, geographically
and seasonally balanced survey of a representative sample
of the U.S. population. The survey response rate,
however, was low and an expert panel concluded that it
was not possible to establish the presence or absence of
non-response bias (USDA, 1992b). Limitations of the
home-produced analysis are given in Chapter 12 of this
volume.
10.4. KEY RECREATIONAL (MARINE FISH
STUDIES)
National Marine Fisheries Service (1986a, b, c;
1993) - The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)
conducts systematic surveys, on a continuing basis, of
marine recreational fishing. These surveys are designed to
estimate the size of the recreational marine finfish catch
by location, species and fishing mode. In addition, the
surveys provide estimates for the total number of
participants in marine recreational finfishing and the total
number of fishing trips. The surveys are not designed to
estimate individual consumption of fish from marine
recreational sources, primarily because they do not
attempt to estimate the number of individuals consuming
the recreational catch. Intake rates for marine recreational
anglers can be estimated, however, by employing
assumptions derived from other data sources about the
number of consumers.
The NMFS surveys involve two, components,
telephone surveys and direct interviewing of fishermen in
the field. The telephone survey randomly samples
residents of coastal regions, defined generally as counties
within 25 miles of the nearest seacoast, and inquires about
participation in marine recreational fishing in the
resident's home state in the past year, and more
specifically, in the past two months. This component of
the survey is used to estimate, for each coastal state, the
total number of coastal region residents who participate
in marine recreational fishing (for finfish) within the
state, as well as the total number of (within state) fishing
trips these residents take. To estimate the total number of
participants and fishing trips in the state, by coastal
residents and others, a ratio approach, based on the field
interview data, was used. Thus, if the field survey data
found that there was a 4:1 ratio of fishing trips taken by
coastal residents as compared to trips taken by non-coastal
and out of state residents, then an additional 25 percent
would be added to the number of trips taken by coastal
residents to generate an estimate of the total number of
within state trips.
The field intercept survey is essentially a creel type
survey. The survey utilizes a national site register which
details marine fishing locations in each state. Sites for
field interviews are chosen in proportion to fishing
frequency at the site. Anglers fishing on shore, private
boat, and charter/party boat modes who had completed
their fishing were interviewed. The field survey included
questions about frequency of fishing, area of fishing, age,
and place of residence. The fish catch was classified by
the interviewer as either type A, type Bl or type B2 catch.
The type A catch denoted fish that were taken whole from
the fishing site and were available for inspection. The type
Bl and B2 catch were not available for inspection; the
former consisted of fish used as bait, filleted, or discarded
dead while the latter was fish released alive. The type A
catch was identified by species and weighed, with the
weight reflecting total fish weight, including inedible
parts. The type Bl catch was not weighed, but weights
were estimated using the average weight derived from the
type A catch for the given species, state, fishing mode and
season of the year. For both the A and Bl catch, the
intended disposition of the catch (e.g., plan to eat, plan to
throw away, etc.) was ascertained.
EPA obtained the raw data tapes from NMFS in
order to generate intake distributions and other specialized
analyses. Fish intake distributions were generated using
the field survey tapes. Weights proportional to the inverse
of the angler's reported fishing frequency were employed
to correct for the unequal probabilities of sampling; this
was the same approach used by NMFS in deriving their
estimates. Note that in the field survey, anglers were
interviewed regardless of past interviewing experience;
thus, the use of inverse fishing frequency as weights was
justified (see Section 10.1).
For each angler interviewed in the field survey, the
yearly amount of fish caught that was intended to be eaten
by the angler and his/her family or friends was estimated
by EPA as follows:
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10-17
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Y = [(wt of A catch) * IA + (wt of Bl catch) * IB] * [Fishing frequency] (Eqn. 10-1)
where IA (IB) are indicator variables equal to 1 if the type
A (Bl) catch was intended to be eaten and equal to 0
otherwise. To convert Y to a daily fish intake rate by the
angler, it was necessary to convert amount of fish caught
to edible amount offish, divide by the number of intended
consumers, and convert from yearly to daily rate.
Although theoretically possible, EPA chose not to use
species specific edible fractions to convert overall weight
to edible fish weight since edible fraction estimates were
not readily available for many marine species. Instead, an
average value of 0.5 was employed. For the number of
intended consumers, EPA used an average value of 2.5
which was an average derived from the results of several
studies of recreational fish consumption (Chemrisk, 1991;
Pufferetal., 1981; Westetal., 1989). Thus, the average
daily intake rate (ADI) for each angler was calculated as
ADI=0
f * (0.5)/[2.5
*365J
(Eqn. 10-2)
Note that ADI will be 0 for those anglers who either did
not intend to eat their catch or who did not catch any fish.
The distribution of ADI among anglers was calculated by
region and coastal status (i.e., coastal versus non-coastal
counties). A mean ADI for the overall population of a
given area was calculated as follows: first the estimated
number of anglers in the area was multiplied by the
average number of intended fish consumers (2.5) to get a
total number of recreational marine finfish consumers.
This number was then multiplied by the mean ADI among
anglers to get the total recreational marine finfish
consumption in the area. Finally, the mean ADI in the
population was calculated by dividing total fish
consumption by the total population in the area.
The results presented below are based on the results
of the 1993 survey. Samples sizes were 200,000 for the
telephone survey and 120,000 for the field surveys. All
coastal states in the continental U.S. were included in the
survey except Texas and Washington.
Table 10-18 presents the estimated number of
coastal, non-coastal, and out-of-state fishing participants
by state and region of fishing. Florida had the greatest
number of both Atlantic and Gulf participants. The total
number of coastal residents who participated in marine
finfishing in their home state was 8 million; an additional
750,000 non-coastal residents
participated in marine finfishing
in their home state.
Table 10-19 presents the
estimated total weight of the A and Bl catch by region and
time of year. For each region, the greatest catches were
during the six-month period from May through October.
This period accounted for about 90 percent of the North
and Mid-Atlantic catch, about 80 percent of the N.
California and Oregon catch, about 70 percent of the S.
Atlantic and S. California catch and 62 percent of the Gulf
catch. Note that in the North and Mid-Atlantic regions,
field surveys were not done in January and February due
to very low fishing activity. For all regions, over half the
catch occurred within 3 miles of the shore or in inland
waterways.
Table 10-20 presents the mean and 95th percentile
of average daily intake of recreationally caught marine
finfish among anglers by region. The mean ADI among
all anglers was 5.6, 7.2, and 2.0 g/day for the Atlantic,
Gulf, and Pacific regions, respectively. Also given is the
per-capita ADI in the overall population (anglers and non-
anglers) of the region and in the overall coastal population
of the region. Table 10-21 gives the distribution of the
catch by species for the Atlantic and Gulf regions and
Table 10-22 for Pacific regions.
The NMFS surveys provide a large, up-to-date,
and geographically representative sample of marine angler
activity in the U.S. The major limitation of this data base
in terms of estimating fish intake is the lack of information
regarding the intended number of consumers of each
angler's catch. In this analysis, it was assumed that every
angler's catch was consumed by the same number (2.5) of
people; this number was derived from averaging the
results of other studies. This assumption introduces a
relatively low level of uncertainty in the estimated mean
intake rates among anglers, but a somewhat higher level
of uncertainty in the estimated intake distributions. It
should be noted that under the above assumption, the
distributions shown here pertain not only to the population
of anglers, but also to the entire population of recreational
fish consumers, which is 2.5 times the number of anglers.
If the number of consumers was changed, to, for instance,
2.0, then the distribution would be increased by a factor
of 1.25 (2.5/2.0) but the estimated population of
recreational fish consumers to which the distribution
would apply would decrease by a factor of 0.8 (2.0/2.5).
Note that the mean intake rate of marine finfish in the
overall population is independent of the assumption of
number of intended fish consumers.
Page
10-18
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-18. Estimated Number of Participants in Marine Recreational
Fishing by State and Subregion
Subreeion
Pacific
North Atlantic
Mid-Atlantic
South Atlantic
Gulf of Mexico
State
So. California
N. California
Oregon
TOTAL
Connecticut
Maine
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
Rhode Island
TOTAL
Delaware
Maryland
New Jersey
New York
Virginia
TOTAL
Florida
Georgia
N. Carolina
S. Carolina
TOTAL
Alabama
Florida
Louisiana
Mississippi
TOTAL
GRAND TOTAL
1 Not additive across states. One person can be counted as
Coastal
Participants
902
534
265
1,701
186
93
377 , ,.
34
97
787
90
540
583
539
294
1,046
1,201
89
398
131
1,819
95
1,053
394
157
1,699
8.053
"OUT OF STATE"
Non Coastal
Participants
8
99
19
126
*'
9
69
10
*
88
*
32
9
13
29
83
*
61
224
77
362
9
*
48
42
99
760
for more than one state.
Out of
State'
159
63
78
47
100
273
32
157
159
268
433
70
131
741
29
745
304
101
1,349
63
51
Total
Participants *
910
633
284
186
102
446
44
97
90
572
592
552
323
1,201
150
622
208
104
1,053
442
200
b An asterisk (*) denotes no non-coastal counties in state.
Source: NMFS. 1993.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10-19
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-19. Estimated Weight of Fish Caught (Catch type A and Bl) by
Marine Recreational Fishermen, by Wave and Subregion
Atlantic and Gulf
JanfFeb
Mar/Apr
May/Jim
Jul.'Aug
StpOct
Nov/Dcc
Reeion
South Atlantic
Gulf
TOTAL
North Atlantic
Mid Atlantic
South Atlantic
Gulf
TOTAL
North Atlantic
Mid Atlantic
South Atlantic
Gulf
TOTAL
North Atlantic
Mid Atlantic
South Atlantic
Gulf
TOTAL
North Atlantic
Mid Atlantic
South Atlantic
Gulf
TOTAL
North Atlantic
Mid Atlantic
South Atlantic
Gulf
TOTAL
GRAND TOTAL
Weieht < 1000 ke)
1.060
3.683
4.743
310
1,030
1,913
3,703
6,956 ;
3,272
4.815
4,234
5,936
18.257
4,003
9,693
4.032
5,964
23,692
2,980
7.798
3,296
7.516
21,590
456
1.649
2,404
4.278
8,787
84.025
Pacific
Region
So. California
N. California
Oregon
TOTAL
So. California
N. California
Oregon
TOTAL
So.California
N. California
Oregon
TOTAL
So. California
N. California
Oregon
TOTAL
So. California
N. California
Oregon
TOTAL
So. California
N. California
Oregon
TOTAL
GRAND TOTAL
Weieht (1000 ke)
418
101
165
684
590
346
144
1,080
1.195
563
581
2,339
1,566
1,101
39
2,706
859
1,032
724
2,615
447
417
_65
929
10.353
Source: NMFS. 1993.
Table 10-20. Average Daily Intake (g/day) of Marine Finfish, by Region and Coastal Status
Intake Among Anglers
Region' Mean 95th Percentile
N. Atlantic 6.2
Mid-Atlantic 6.3
S. Atlantic 4.7
All Atlantic 5.6
Gulf 7.2
S. California 2.0
N. California 2.0
Oregon 2.2
AH Pacific 2.0
20.1
18.9 ,
15.9
18.0
26.1
5.5
5.7
8.9
6.8
1 N. Atlantic - ME, NH, MA. RI. and CT: Mid-Atlantic - NY, NJ, MD. DE.
LA. and FLl Gulf Coast).
* Mean intake rate among entire coastal population of region.
* Mean inuke rate among entire population of region.
Source: NMFS. 1993.
Per-Capita
(Coastal)*
1.2
1.2
1.5
1.3
3.0
0.2
0.3
0.5
0.3
and VA; S. Atlantic
Per-Capita Proportion of
(Coastal & Non-Coastal)" Population Coastal
1.1
0.9
1.0
0.9
1.9
0.2
0.3
0.5
0.3
NC, SC, GA. and FL (Atlantic Coast);
0.82
0.70
0.51
0.66
0.60
0.96
0.70
0.87
0.86
Gulf- AL, MS,
Page
10-20
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II-FoodIngestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-21. Estimated Weight of Fish Caught (Catch Type A and Bl)' by Marine Recreational Fishermen
by Species Group and Subregion, Atlantic and Gulf
North Atlantic
Cartilaginous fishes
Eels
Herrings
Catfishcs
Toadfishes
Cods and Hakes
Searobins
Sculpins
Temperate Basses
Sea Basses
Bluefish
Jacks
Dolphins
Snappers
Grunts
Porgies
Drums
Mullets
Barracudas
Wrasses
Mackerels and Tunas
Flounders
Triggerfishes/Filefishes
Puffers
Other fishes
(1.000 ke)
66
14
118
0
0
2,404
2
1
837
22
4,177
0
65
0
0
132
3
1
0
783
878
512
0
*
105
Mid Atlantic
(1.000 to
1,673
9
69
306
7
988
68
2,166
2,166
3,962
138
809
*
9
417
2,458
43
*
1.953
3,348
4,259
48
16
72
South Atlantic
(1.000 ke>
162
*ป
1
138
0
4
*
0
22
644
1,065
760
2,435
508
239
1,082
2,953
382
356
46
4,738
532
109
56
709
Gulf
(1.000kg) .
318
0=
89
535
*
0
o
4
2,477
158
2,477
1,599
3,219
816
2,629
9,866
658
244
113
4,036
377
544
4
915
1 For Catch Type A and Bl, the fish were not thrown back.
' An asterisk (*) denotes data not reported.
c Zero (0) =< 1000 kg.
Source: NMFS. 1993.
All Regions
(1.000 kel
2,219
23
177
979
7
1,396
70
2,229
5,309
5,362
3,375
4,908
3,727
1,064
4,160
15,280
1,084
600
2,895
13,000
5,680
701
76
Table 10-22. Estimated Weight of Fish Caught (Catch Type A and Bl)1 by Marine Recreational
Fishermen by Species Group and Subreeion. Pacific
Southern California
Species Grouo d
Cartilaginous fish
Sturgeons
Herrings
Anchovies
Smelts
Cods arid Hakes
Silversides
Striped Bass
Sea Basses
Jacks ,
Croakers
Sea Chubs
Surfperches
Pacific Barracuda
Wrasses
Tunas and Mackerels
Rockfishes
California Scorpionfish
Sablefishes
Greenlings
Sculpins
Flatfishes
Other fishes <
000 te-)
35
0>
10
*c
0
0
58
0
1,319
469
141
53
74
866
73
1,260
409
86
0
22
6
106
89
Northern California
(1.000 kel
162
89
15
7
71
0
148
51
17
17
136
1
221
10
5
36
1,713
0
0
492
81
251
Oregon
(1.000 kel
1
13
40
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
47
0
0
1
890
0
5
363
44
5
307
For Catch Type A and Bl, the fish were not thrown back.
' Zero (0) = < 1000 kg.
ฐ An asterisk (*) denotes data not reported.
Source: NMFS. 1993.
Total
198
102
65
7
71
0
206
5]
1,336
487
277
54
342
876
78
1 297
3 012
86
5
877
131
362
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10-21
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Another uncertainty involves the use of 0.5 as an
(average) edible fraction. This figure is somewhat
conservative (i.e., the true average edible fraction is
probably lower); thus, the intake rates calculated here may
be biased upward somewhat.
It should be noted again that the recreational fish
intake distributions given refer only to marine finfish. In
addition, the intake rates calculated are based only on the
catch of anglers in their home state. Marine fishing
performed out-of-state would not be included in these
distributioas. Therefore, these distributions give an
estimate of consumption of locally caught fish.
10.5 RELEVANT RECREATIONAL MARINE
STUDIES
Pitfferet al. - Intake Rates of Potentially Hazardous
Marine Fish Caught in the Metropolitan Los Angeles Area
- Puffer et al. (1981) conducted a creel survey with sport
fishermen in the Los Angeles area in 1980. The survey
was conducted at 12 sites in the harbor and coastal areas
to evaluate intake rates of potentially hazardous marine
fish and shellfish by local, non-professional fishermen. It
was conducted for the full 1980 calendar year, although
inclement weather in January, February, and March
limited the interview days. Each site was surveyed an
average of three times per month, on different days, and
at a different time of the day. The survey questionnaire
was designed to collect information on demographic
characteristics, fishing patterns, species, number of fish
caught, and fish consumption patterns. Scales were used
to obtain fish weights. Interviews were conducted only
with anglers who had caught fish, and the anglers were
interviewed only once during the entire survey period.
Puffer et al. (1981) estimated daily consumption
rates (grams/day) for each angler using the following
equation:
(KxNxWxF)/[Ex365]
(Eqn. 10-3)
where;
K = edible fraction of fish (0.25 to 0.5 depending on
species);
F = frequency of fishing/year;
E = number of fish eaters in family/living group;
\V average weight of (grams) fish in catch; and
X = number of fish in catch.
No explipit survey weights were used in analyzing this
survey; thus, each respondent's data was given equal
weight.
A total of 1,059 anglers were interviewed for the
survey. The ethnic and age distribution of respondents is
shown in Table 10-23; 88 percent of respondents were
male. The median intake rate was higher for
Oriental/Samoan anglers (median 70.6 g/day) than for
other ethnic groups and higher for those ages over 65
years (median 113.0 g/day) than for other age groups.
Puffer et al. (1981) found similar median intake rates for
seasons; 36.3 g/day for November through March and
37.7 g/day for April through October. Puffer et al.
(1981) also evaluated fish preparation methods; these data
are presented in Appendix 10B. The cumulative
distribution of recreational fish (finfish and shellfish)
consumption by survey respondents is presented in Table
10-24; this distribution was calculated only for those
fishermen who indicated they eat the fish they catch. The
median fish consumption rate was 37 g/day and the 90th
percentile rate was 225 g/day (Puffer et al., 1981). A
description of catch patterns for primary fish species kept
is presented in Table 10-25.
Table 10-23. Median Intake Rates Based on Demographic Data
of Sport Fishermen and Their Family/Living Group
Percent of total
interviewed
Ethnic Group
Caucasian
Black
Mexican- American
Oriental/Samoan
Other
Age (years)
< 17
18-40
41-65
> 65
42
24
16
13
5
11
52
28
9
Median intake rates
(g/person-day)
46.0
24.2
33.0
70.6
27.2
32.5
39.0
113.0
Not reported.
Source: Puffer etal., 1981.
Page
10-22
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Skzllfish
Table 10-24. Cumulative Distribution of Total Fish/Shellfish
Consumption by Surveyed Sport Fishermen
in the Metropolitan Los Angeles Area
Percentile
5
10
20
30
40
50
60
'70
80
90
95
Intake rate (g/person-day)
2.3
4.0
8.3
15.5
23.9
36.9
53.2
79.8
120.8
224.8
338.8
Source: Puffer etal. O981).
Table 10-25. Catch Information for Primary Fish Species Kept
by Sport Fishermen (n = 1059)
Species
White Croaker
Pacific Mackerel
Pacific Bonito
Queenfish
Jackstnelt
Walleye Perch
Shiner Perch
Opaleye
Black Perch
Kelp Bass
California Halibut
Shellfish1
" Crab, mussels, lobster
Average Weight
(Grams)
153
334
717
143
223
115
54
307
196
440
1752
421
, abalone.
Percent of
Fishermen who
Caught
34
25
18
17
13
10
7
6
5
5
4
3
Source: Modified from Puffer et al., 1981.
As mentioned in the Background to this Chapter,
intake distributions derived from analyses of creel surveys
which did not employ weights reflective of sampling
probabilities will overestimate the target population intake
distribution and will, in fact, be more reflective of the
"resource utilization distribution". Therefore, the
reported median level of 37.3 g/day does not reflect the
fact that 50 percent of the target population has intake
above this level; instead 50 percent of recreational fish
consumption is by individuals consuming at or above 37.3
g/day. In order to generate an intake distribution
reflective of that in the target population, weights
inversely proportional to sampling probability need to be
employed. Price et al. (1994) made this attempt with the
Puffer et al. (1981) survey data, using inverse fishing
frequencies as the sampling weights. Price et al. (1994)
was unable to get the raw data for this survey, but using
frequency tables and the average level of fish consumption
per fishing trip provided in Puffer et al. (1981), generated
an approximate revised .intake distribution. This
distribution was dramatically lower than that obtained by
Puffer et al. (1981); the median was estimated at 2.9
g/day (compared with 37.3 from Puffer et al., 1981) and
the 90th percentile at 35 g/day (compared to 225 g/day
from Puffer etal., 1981).
There are several limitations to the interpretation of
the percentiles presented by both Puffer et al. (1981) and
Price et al. (1994). As described in Appendix 10A, the
interpretation of percentiles reported from creel surveys in
terms of percentiles of the "resource utilization
distribution" is approximate and depends on several
assumptions. One of these assumptions is that sampling
probability is proportional to inverse fishing frequency.
In this survey, where interviewers revisited sites numerous
times and anglers were not interviewed more than once,
this assumption is not valid, though it is likely that the
sampling probability is still highly dependant on fishing
frequency so that the assumption does hold in an
approximate sense. The validity of this assumption also
impacts the interpretation of percentiles reported by Price
et al. (1994) since inverse frequency was used as sampling
weights. It is likely that the value (2.9 g/day) of Price et
al. (1994) underestimates somewhat the median intake in
the target population, but is much closer to the actual
value than the Puffer et al. (1981) estimate of 37.3 g/day.
Similar statements would apply about the 90th percentile.
Similarly, the 37.3 g/day median value, if interpreted as
the 50th percentile of the "resource utilization
distribution", is also somewhat of an underestimate.
It should be noted again that the fish intake
distribution generated by Puffer et al. (1981) (and by Price
et al., 1994) was based only on fishermen who caught fish
and ate the fish they caught. If all anglers were included,
intake estimates would be somewhat lower. In contrast,
the survey assumed drat the number of fish caught at the
time of the interview was all that would be caught that
day. If it were possible to interview fishermen at the
conclusion of their fishing day, intake estimates could be
potentially higher. An additional factor potentially
affecting intake rates is that fishing quarantines were
imposed in early spring due to heavy sewage overflow
(Puffer etal., 1981).
Pierce etal. (1981) - Commencement Bay Seafood
Consumption Study - Pierce et al. (1981) performed a
local creel survey to examine seafood consumption
patterns and demographics of sport fishermen in
Commencement Bay, Washington. The objectives of this
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10-23
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 -Intake of Fish and Shellfish
survey included determining (1) seafood consumption
habits and demographics of non-commercial anglers
catching seafood; (2) the extent to which resident fish
were used as food; and (3) the method of preparation of
the fish to be consumed. Salmon were excluded from the
survey since it was believed that they had little potential
for contamination. The first half of this survey was
conducted from early My to mid-September, 1980 and the
second half from mid-September through most of
November. During the summer months, interviewers
visited each of 4 sub-areas of Commencement Bay on five
mornings and five evenings; in the fall the areas were
sampled 4 complete survey days. Interviews were
conducted only with persons who had caught fish. The
anglers were interviewed only once during the survey
period. Data were recorded for species, wet weight, size
of the living group (family, place of residence, fishing
frequency, planned uses of the fish, age, sex, and race
(Pierce et al., 1981). The analysis of Pierce et al. (1981)
did not employ explicit sampling weights (i.e., all weights
were set to 1).
There were 304-interviews in the summer and 204
in the fall. About 60 percent of anglers were white, 20
percent black, 19 percent Oriental and the rest Hispanic or
Native American. Table 10-26 gives the distribution of
fishing frequency calculated by Pierce et al. (1981); for
both the summer and fall, more than half of the fishermen
caught and consumed fish weekly. The dominant (by
weight) species caught were Pacific Hake and Walleye
Pollock. Pierce et al. (1981) did not present a distribution
of fish intake or a mean fish intake rate.
Table 10-26. Percent of Fishing Frequency During the
Summer and Fall Seasons in
Commencement Bay, Washington
Fisliing Frequency Frequency Frequency
Frequency Percent in Percent in Percent in the
the Summer1 the Fall" Fall"
Daily
Weekly
Monthly
Bimonthly
Biy early
Yearly
10.4
50.3
20.1
6.7
4.4
8.1
8.3
52.3
15.9
3.8
6.1
13.6
5.8
51.0
21.1
4.2
6.3
11.6
" Summer - July through September, includes 5 survey days
and 4 survey areas (i.e., area #1, #2, #3 and #4)
* Fall - September through November, includes 4 survey days
and 4 survey areas (i.e., area #1, #2, #3 and #4)
e Fall - September through November, includes 4 survey days
described in footnote * plus an additional survey area (5
survey areas) (i.e., area #1, #2, #3, #4 and #5)
Source: Pierce et al., 1981.
The U.S. EPA (1989) used the Pierce et al. (1981)
fishing frequency distribution and an estimate of the
average amount of fish consumed per angling trip to create
an approximate intake distribution for the Pierce et al.
(1981) survey. The estimate of the amount of fish
consumed per angling trip (380 g/person-trip) was based
on data on mean fish catch weight and mean number of
consumers reported in Pierce et. al. (1981) and on an
edible fraction of 0.5. EPA (1989) reported a median
intake rate of 23 g/day.
Price et al. (1994) obtained the raw data from this
survey and performed a re-analysis using sampling
weights proportional to inverse fishing frequency. The
rationale for these weights is explained in Section 10.1 and
in the discussion above of the Puffer et al. (1981) study.
In the re-analysis Price et al. (1994) found a median intake
rate of 1.0 g/day and a 90th percentile rate of 13 g/day.
The distribution of fishing frequency generated by Price
et al. (1994) is shown in Table 10-27. Note that when
equal weights were used, Price found a median rate of 19
g/day, which was close to the approximate EPA (1989)
value reported above of 23 g/day.
Table 10-27. Selected Percentile Consumption Estimates (g/d)
for the Survey and Total Angler Populations Based
on the Reanalysis of the Puffer and Pierce Data
50th Percentile
Survey Population
Puffer
Pierce
Average
Total Angler Population
Puffer
Pierce
Averaee
37
J9
28
2.9"
U)
2.0
90th Percentile
225
155
190
35"
13
24
Estimated based on the average intake for the 0 - 90th percentile
anglers.
* Estimated based on the average intake for the 91st - 96th
percentile anglers.
Source: Price et al.. 1994.
The same limitations apply to interpreting the
results presented here to those presented above in the
discussion of Puffer etal. (1981). The median intake rate
found by Price et al. (1994) (using inverse frequency
weights) is more reflective of median intake in the target
population than is the value of 19 g/day (or 23 g/day); the
latter value reflects more the 50th percentile of the
resource utilization distribution, (i.e., that anglers with
intakes above 19 g/day consume 50 percent of the
recreational fish catch). Similarly, the fishing frequency
Page
10-24
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
distribution generated by Price et al. (1994) is more
reflective of the fishing frequency distribution in the target
population than is the distribution presented in Pierce et al.
(1981). Note the target population is those anglers who
fished at Commencement Bay during the time period of
the survey.
As with the Puffer et al. (1981) data, these values
(1.0 g/day and 19 g/day) are both probably underestimates
since the sampling probabilities are less than proportional
to fishing frequency; thus, the true target population
median is probably somewhat above 1.0 g/day and the
true 50th percentile of the resource utilization distribution
is probably somewhat higher than 19 g/day. The data
from this survey provide an indication of consumption
patterns for the time period around 1980 in the
Commencement Bay area. However, the data may not
reflect current consumption patterns because fishing
advisories were instituted due to local contamination.
Health Study to Assess the Human Health Effects of
Mercury Exposure to Fish Consumed from the Everglades
- A .health study was conducted in two phases in the
Everglades, Florida for the U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services (U.S.DHHS, 1995). The objectives
of the first phase were to: (a) describe the human
populations at risk for mercury exposure through their
consumption offish and other contaminated animals from
the Everglades and (b) evaluate the extent of mercury
exposure in those persons consuming contaminated food
and their compliance with the voluntary health advisory.
The second phase of the study involved neurologic testing
of all study participants who had total mercury levels in
hair greater than 7.5 ^g/g. Study participants were
identified by using special targeted screenings, mailings to
residents, postings and multi-media advertisements of the
study throughout the Everglades region, and direct
discussions with people fishing along the canals and
waterways in the contaminated areas. The contaminated
areas were identified by the interviewers and long-term
Everglade residents. Of a total of 1,794 individuals
sampled, 405 individuals were eligible to participate in the
study because they had consumed fish or wildlife from the
Everglades at least once per month in the last 3 months of
the study period. The majority of the eligible participants
(> 93 percent) were either subsistence fishermen,
Everglade residents, or both. Of the total eligible
participants, 55 individuals refused to participate in the
survey. Useable data were obtained from 330 respondents
ranging in age from 10-81 years of age (mean age 39
years + 18.8) (U.S.DHHS, 1995). Respondents were
administered a three page questionnaire from which
demographic information, fishing and eating habits, and
other variables were obtained (U.S.DHHS, 1995).
Table 10-28 shows the ranges, means, and standard
deviations of selected characteristics by subgroups of the
survey population. Sixty-two percent of the respondents
were male with a slight preponderance of black individuals
(43 percent white, 46 percent black non-Hispanic, and 11
percent Hispanic) (Table 10-28). Most of the respondents
reported earning an annual income of $15,000 or less per
family before taxes (U.S. DHHS, 1995). The mean
number of years fished along the canals by the
respondents was 15.8 years with a standard deviation of
15.8. The mean number of times per week fish
consumers reported eating fish over the last 6 months and
last month of the survey period was 1.8 and 1.5 per week
with a standard deviation of 2.5 and 1.4, respectively
(Table 10-28). Table 10-28 also indicates that 71 percent
of the respondents reported knowing about the mercury
health advisories. Of those who were aware, 26 percent
reported that they had lowered their consumption of fish
caught in the Everglades while the rest (74 percent)
reported no change in consumption patterns (U.S.DHHS
1995).
Table 10-28. Means and Standard Deviations of
Selected Characteristics by Subpopulation
Groups in Everglades, Florida
Variables
(N"=33m
Age (years)
Sex
Female
Male
Race/ethnicity
Black
White
Hispanic
Number of Years Fished
Number Per Week Fished in
Past 6 Months of Survey
Period
Number Per Week Fished in
Last Month of Survey Period
Aware of Health Advisories
Mean ฑ Std.
Dev."
38.6 ฑ 18.8
38%
62%
46%
43%
11%
15.8 ฑ 15.8
1.8 ฑ 2.5
1.5 ฑ 1.4
71%
' Number of respondents who reported consuming
Ranee
2- 81
-
0-70
0-20
0- 12
..
fish
b Std. Dev. = standard deviation
Source: U.S. DHHS. 1995
A limitation of this study is that fish intake rates
(g/day) were not reported. Another limitation is that the
survey was site limited, and, therefore, not representative
of the U.S. population. An advantage of this study is that
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10-25
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
it is one of the few studies targeting subsistence
fishermen.
10.6. KEY FRESHWATER RECREATIONAL
STUDIES
Chemrisk - Consumption of Freshwater Fish by
Maine Anglers - Chemrisk conducted a study to
characterize the rates of freshwater fish consumption
among Maine residents (Chemrisk, 1991; Ebert et al.,
1993). Since the only dietary source of local freshwater
fish is recreational fish, the anglers in Maine were chosen
as the survey population. The survey was designed to
gather information on the consumption of fish caught by
anglers from flowing (rivers and streams) and standing
(lakes and ponds) water bodies. Respondents were asked
to recall the frequency of fishing trips during the 1989-
1990 ice-fishing season and the 1990 open water season,
the number of fish species caught during both seasons, and
estimate the number of fish coasumed from 15 fish
species. The respondents were also asked to describe the
number, species, and average length of each sport-caught
fish caught and consumed that had been gifts from other
members of their households or other household. The
weight of fish consumed by anglers was calculated by first
multiplying die estimated weight of the fish by the edible
fraction, and then dividing this product by the number of
intended consumers. Species specific regression equations
were utilized to estimate weight from the reported fish
length. The edible fractions used were 0.4 for salmon,
0.78 for Atlantic smelt, and 0.3 for all other species
(Ebert etal., 1993).
A total of 2,500 prospective survey participants
were randomly selected from a list of anglers licensed in
Maine. The surveys were mailed in during October,
1990. Since this was before the end of the open fishing
season, respondents were also asked to predict how many
more open water fishing trips they would undertake in
1990.
Chemrisk (1991) and Ebert et al. (1993) calculated
distributions of freshwater fish intake for two populations,
"all anglers" and "consuming anglers". All anglers
were defined as licensed anglers who fished during either
the 1989-.1990 ice-fishing season or the 1990 open-water
season (consumers and non-consumers) and licensed
anglers who did not fish but consumed freshwater fish
caught in Maine during these seasons while "consuming
anglers" were defined as those anglers who consumed
freshwater fish obtained from Maine sources during the
1989-1990 ice fishing or 1990 open water fishing season.
In addition, the distribution of fish intake from rivers and
streams was also calculated for two populations, those
fishing on rivers and streams ("river anglers") and those
consuming fish from rivers and streams (" coasuming
river anglers").
A total of 1,612 surveys were returned, giving a
response rate of 64 percent; 1,369 (85 percent) of the
1,612 respondents were included in the "all angler"
population and 1,053 (65 percent) were included in the
"consuming angler" population. Freshwater fish intake
distributions for these populations are presented in Table
10-29. The mean and 95th percentile was 5.0 g/day and
21.0g/day, respectively, for " all anglers," and 6.4 g/day
and 26.0 g/day, respectively, for "consuming anglers."
Table 10-29 also presents intake distributions for fish
caught from rivers and streams. Among "river anglers"
the mean and 95th percentiles were 1.9 g/day and 6.2
g/day, respectively, while among "consuming river
anglers" the mean was 3.7 g/day and the 95th percentile
12.0 g/day. Table 10-30 presents fish intake distributioas
by ethnic group for consuming anglers. The highest mean
intake rates reported are for Native Americans (10 g/day)
and French Canadians (7.4 g/day). Because there was a
low number of respondents for Hispanic, Asian/Pacific
Islander, and African Americans, intake rates within these
subgroups were not calculated (Chemrisk, 1991).
The consumption, by species, of freshwater fish
caught is presented in Table 10-31. The largest specie
consumption was salmon from ice fishing ( 292,000
grams); white perch (380,000 grams) for lakes and ponds;
and Brooktrout (420,000 grams) for rivers and streams
(Chemrisk, 1991).
EPA obtained the raw data tapes from the marine
anglers survey and performed some specialized analyses.
One analysis involved examining the percentiles of the
"resource utilization distribution" (this distribution was
defined in Section 10.1). The 50th, or more generally the
pth, percentile of the resource utilization distribution is
defined as the consumption level such that p percent of the
resource is consumed by individuals with consumptions
below this level and 100-p percent by individuals with
consumptions above this level. EPA found that 90
percent of recreational fish consumption was by
individuals with intake rates above 3.1 g/day and 50
percent was by individuals with intakes above 20 g/day.
Those above 3.1 g/day make up about 30 percent of the
"all angler" population and those above 20 g/day make up
about 5 percent of this population; thus, the top 5 percent
of the angler population consumed 50 percent of the
recreational fish catch.
Page
10-26
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-29. Estimates of Fish Intake Rates of Licensed Sport Anglers in Maine During the 1989-1990
Ice Fishing or 1990 Open-Water Seasons'
Intake Rates (grams/day)
Percentile Rankings
All Waters'
All Anglers' Consuming Anglers"
River Anglers'
Rivers and Streams
Consuming Anglers'1
= 464)
50th (median)
66th
75th
90th
95th
Arithmetic Mearf
1.1
2.6
4.2
11.0
21.0
5.0
F791
2.0
4.0
5.8
13.0
26.0
6.4
F771
0.19
0.71
1.3
3.7
6.2
1.9
T821
0.99
1.8
2.5
6.1
12.0
3.7
ran
' Estimates are based on rank except for those of arithmetic mean.
b All waters based on fish obtained from all lakes, ponds, streams and rivers in Maine, from other household sources and from other
non-household sources.
c Licensed anglers who fished during the seasons studied and did or did not consume freshwater fish, and licensed anglers who did not
fish but ate freshwater fish caught in Maine during those seasons.
d Licensed anglers who consumed freshwater fish caught in Maine during the seasons studied.
1 Those of the "all anglers" who fished on rivers or streams (consumers and nonconsumers).
' Values in brackets [ ] are percentiles at the mean consumption rates.
Source: Chemrisk. 1991: Ebert et al.. 1993.
Table 10-30. Analysis of Fish Consumption by Ethnic Groups for "All Waters" (grams/day)'
Consuming Anglers"
French Canadian Native Other White
Heritage Irish Heritage Italian American Non-Hispanic
Heritage Heritage Heritage
N of Cases 201 138 27 96 533
Median (50th percentile)'-'1 2.3 2.4 1.8 2.3 1.9
66th percentile0-" 4.1 4.4 2.6 4.7 3.8
75th percentile0-" 6.2 6.0 5.0 6.2 5.7
Arithmetic Mearf 7.4 5.2 4.5 10 6.0
Percentile at the Mean" 80 70 74 83 76
gOthpercentile^ 15 12 12 16 13
95thpercentile=-d 27 20 21 51 24
Percentile at 6.5 g/day41 77 75 81 77 77
1 "All Waters" based on fish obtained from all lakes, ponds, streams and rivers in Maine, from other household sources and
household sources.
b "Consuming Anglers" refers to only those anglers who consumed freshwater fish obtained from Maine sources during the
fishing or 1990 open water fishing season.
c The average consumption per day by freshwater fish consumers in the household.
d Calculated by rank without any assumption of statistical distribution.
' Fish consumption rate recommended by EPA (1984) for use in establishing ambient water quality standards.
Source: Chemrisk, 1991.
Scandinavian
Heritage
37
1.3
2.6
4.9
5.3
78
9.4
25
84
from other non-
1989-1990 ice
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10-27
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-31. Total Consumption of Freshwater Fish Caught by All Survey Respondents During the 1990 Season
Ice Fishing
Species
Landlocked salmon .
Atlantic salmon
Togue (Lake trout)
Brook trout
Brown trout
Yellow perch
While perch
Bass (smallmoulh and largemouth)
Pickerel
Lake whitcfisli
HorufKHit (Catfish and bullheads)
liod'jiii fish (Suckers, carp and sturgeon)
Club
Smelt
Other
TOTALS
Quantity
Consumed
r#>
832
3
483
1,309
275
235
2,544
474
1,091
111
47
50
0
7,808
201
15.463
Grams
(xlO*)
Consumed
290
1.1
200
100
54
9.1
160
120
180
20
8.2
Hi
0
150
210
1.583.4
Lakes and Ponds
Quantity
Consumed
ซ0
928
33
459
3,294
375
1,649
6,540
73
553
558
1,291
62
252
428
90
16.587
Grams
(xlO5)
Consumed
340
9.9
160
210
56
52
380
5.9
91
13
100
22
35
4.9
110
1.590
Rivers and Streams
Quantity
Consumed
(#>
305
17
33
10,185
338
188
3,013
787
303
55
180
100
219
4,269
54
20.046
Grams
(xlO>)
Consumed
120
11
2.7
420
23
7.4
180
130
45
2.7
7.8
6.7
130
37
45
1.168
Source; Ctemrisk. 1991.
EPA also performed an analysis of fish
consumption among anglers and their families. This
analysis was possible because the survey included
questions on the number, sex, and age of each individual
in the household and whether the individual consumed
recreationally caught fish. The total population of licensed
anglers in this survey and their household members was
4,872; the average household size for the 1,612 anglers in
the survey was thus 3.0 persons. Fifty-six percent of the
population was male and 30 percent were 18 or under.
A total of 55 percent of this population was
reported to consume freshwater recreationally caught fish
in the year of die survey. The sex and ethnic distribution
of the consumers was similar to that of the overall
population. The distribution of fish intake among the
overall household population, or among consumers in the
household, can be calculated under the assumption that
recreationally caught fish was shared equally among all
members of the household reporting consumption of such
fish (note this assumption was used above to calculate
intake rates for anglers). With this assumption, the mean
intake rate among consumers was 5.9 g/day with a median
of 1.8 and a 95th percentile of 23.1 g/day; for the overall
population the mean was 3.2 g/day and the 95th percentile
14.1 g/day.
The results of this survey can be put into the
context of the overall Maine population. The 1,612
anglers surveyed represent about 0.7 percent of the
estimated 225,000 licensed anglers in Maine. It is
reasonable to assume that licensed anglers and their
families will have the highest exposure to recreationally
caught freshwater fish. Thus, to estimate the number of
persons in Maine with recreationally caught freshwater
fish intake above, for instance, 6.5 g/day (the 80th
percentile among household consumers in this survey),
one can assume that virtually all persons came from the
population of licensed anglers and their families. The
number of persons above 6.5 g/day in the household
survey population is calculated by taking 20 percent (i.e.,
100 percent - 80 percent) of the consuming population in
the survey; this number then is 0.2*(0.55*4872) =536.
Dividing this number by the sampling fraction of 0.007
(0.7 percent) gives about 77,000 persons above 6.5 g/day
of recreational freshwater fish consumption statewide. The
1990 census showed the population of Maine to be 1.2
million people; thus the 77,000 persons above 6.5 g/day
represent about 6 percent of the state's population.
Chemrisk (1991) reported that the fish consumption
estimates obtained from the survey were conservative
because of assumptions made in the analysis. The
assumptions included: a 40 percent estimate as the edible
portion of land locked and Atlantic salmon; inclusion of
the intended number of future fishing trips and an
assumption that the average success and consumption rates
for the individual angler during the trips already taken
would continue through future trips. The data collected
Page
10-28
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
for this study were based on recall and self-reporting
which may have resulted in a biased estimate. The social
desirability of the sport and frequency of fishing are also
bias contributing factors; successful anglers are among the
highest consumers of freshwater fish (Chemrisk, 1991).
Over reporting appears to be correlated with skill level and
the importance of the activity to the individual; it is likely
that the higher consumption rates may be substantially
overstated (Chemrisk, 1991). Additionally, fish
advisories are in place in these areas and may affect the
rate of fish consumption among anglers. The survey
results showed that in 1990, 23 percent of all anglers
consumed no freshwater fish, and 55 percent of the river
anglers ate no freshwater fish. An advantage of this study
is that it presents area-specific consumption patterns and
the sample size is rather large.
Michigan Sport Anglers Fish Consumption Survey,
1989 - West et al. (1989) surveyed a stratified random
sample of Michigan residents with fishing licences. The
sample was divided into 18 cohorts, with one cohort
receiving a mail questionnaire each week between January
and May 1989. The survey included both a short term
recall component recording respondents' fish intake over
a seven day period and a usual frequency component. For
the short-term component, respondents were asked to
identify all household members and list all fish meals
consumed by each household member during the past
seven days. The source of the fish for each meal was
requested (self-caught, gift, market, or restaurant).
Respondents were asked to categorize serving size by
comparison with pictures of 8 oz. fish portions; serving
sizes could be designated as either "about the same size",
"less", or "more" than the 8 oz. picture. Data on fish
species, locations of self-caught fish and methods of
preparation and cooking were also obtained.
The usual frequency component of the survey asked
about the frequency of fish meals during each of the four
seasons and requested respondents to give the overall
percentage of household fish meals that come from
recreational sources. A sample of 2,600 individuals were
selected from state records to receive survey
questionnaires. A total of 2,334 survey questionnaires
were deliverable and 1,104 were completed and returned,
giving a response rate of 47.3 percent among individuals
receiving questionnaires.
In the analysis of the survey data by West et. al.
(1989), the authors did not attempt to generate the
distribution of recreationally caught fish intake in the
survey population. EPA obtained the raw data of this
survey for the purpose of generating fish intake
distributions and other specialized analyses.
As described elsewhere in this handbook,
percentiles of the distribution of average daily intake
reflective of long-term consumption patterns can not in
general be estimated using short-term (e.g., one week)
data. Such data can be used to estimate mean average
daily intake rates (reflective of short or long term
consumption); in addition, short term data can serve to
validate estimates of usual intake based on longer recall.
EPA first analyzed the short term data with the
intent of estimating mean fish intake rates. In order to
compare these results with those based on usual intake,
only respondents with information on both short term and
usual intake were included in this analysis. For the
analysis of the short term data, EPA modified the serving
size weights used by West et al. (1989), which were 5, 8
and 10 oz., respectively, for portions that were less, about
the same, and more than the 8 oz. picture. EPA
examined the percentiles of the distribution of fish meal
sizes reported in Pao et al. (1982) derived from the 1977-
1978 USDA National Food Consumption Survey and
observed that a lognormal distribution provided a good
visual fit to the percentile data. Using this lognormal
distribution, the mean values for serving sizes greater than
8 oz. and for serving sizes at least 10 percent greater than
8 oz. were determined. In both cases a serving size of 12
oz. was consistent with the Pao et al. (1982) distribution.
The weights used in the EPA analysis then were 5,8, and
12 oz. for fish meals described as less, about the same,
and more than the 8 oz. picture, respectively. It should be
noted that the mean serving size from Pao et al. (1982)
was about 5 oz., well below the value of 8 oz. most
commonly reported by respondents in the West et al.
(1989) survey.
Table 10-32 displays the mean number of total and
recreational fish meals for each household member based
on the seven day recall data. Also shown are mean fish
intake rates derived by applying the weights described
above to each fish meal. Intake was calculated on both a
grams/day and grams/kg body weight/day basis. This
analysis was restricted to individuals who eat fish and who
reside in households reporting some recreational fish
consumption during the previous year. About 75 percent
of survey respondents (i.e., licensed anglers) and about 84
percent of respondents who fished in the prior year
reported some household recreational fish consumption.
The EPA analysis next attempted to use the short
term data to validate the usual intake data. West et al.
(1989) asked the main respondent in each household to
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10-29
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-32. Mean Fish Intake Among Individuals Who Eat Fish and Reside
in Households With Recreational Fish Consumption
Group
All household
members
Respondents (i.e.,
licensed anglers)
AEG Groups (years)
1-5
6 to 10
I to 20
21 to 40
401060
60 to 70
71 to 80
80+
All Fish
meals/week
0.686
0.873
0.463
0.49
0.407
0.651
0.923
0.856
1.0
0.8
Source: t'.S. EPA analysis usine data
Recreational Fish
meals/week
0.332
0.398
0.223
0.278
0.229
0.291
0.42
0.431
0.622
0.6
from West etal.. 1989.
n
2196
748
121
151
349
793
547
160
45
10
Total Fish
erams/dav
21.9
' 29.4
11.4
13.6
12.3
22
29.3
28.2
32.3
26.5
Recreational
Fish
erams/dav
11.0
14.0
5.63
7.94
7.27
10.2
14.2
14.5
20.1
20
Total Fish
grams/
kg/dav
0.356
0.364
0.737
0.481
0.219
0.306
0.387
0.377
0.441
0.437
Recreational
Fish grams/
ka/dav
0.178
0.168
0.369
0.276
0.123
0.139
0.186
0.193
0.271
0.345
provide estimates of their usual frequency of fishing and
eating fish, by season, during the previous year. The
survey provides a series of frequency categories for each
season and the respondent was asked to check the
appropriate range. The ranges used for all questions
were: almost daily, 2-4 times a week, once a week* 2-3
times a month, once a month, less often, none, and don't
know. For quantitative analysis of the data it is necessary
to convert this categorical information into numerical
frequency values. As some of the ranges are relatively
broad, the choice of conversion values can have some
effect on intake estimates. In order to obtain optimal
values, the usual fish eating frequency reported by
respondents for the season during which the questionnaire
was completed was compared to the number of fish meals
reportedly consumed by respondents over the seven day
short-term recall period. The results of these comparisons
are displayed in Table 10-33; it shows that, on average,
there is general agreement between estimates made using
one year recall and estimates based on seven day recall.
The average number of meals (1.%) was at the
bottom of the range for the most frequent consumption
group with data (2-4 meals/week). In contrast for the
lower usual frequency categories the average number of
meals was at the top, or exceeded the top of category
range. This suggests some tendency for relatively
infrequent fish eaters to underestimate their usual
frequency of fish consumption. The last column of the
table shows the estimated fish eating frequency per week
that was selected for use in making quantitative estimates
Table 10-33.
Usual Fish Consumption
Frequency Category
Almost daily
2-4 times a week
Once a week
2-3 times a month
Once a month
Less often
Comparison of Seven-Day Recall and Estimated Seasonal
Mean Fish Meals/Week
7-dav Recall Data
no data
1.96
1.19
0.840 (3.6 times/month)
0.459 (1.9 times/month)
0.306 (1.3 times/month)
Frequency for Fish Consumption
Usual frequency Value Selected for
Data Aanalvsis (times/week)
4 [if needed]
2
1.2
0.7 (3 times/month)
0.4 (1.7 times/month)
0.2 (0.9 times/month)
Source? I'.S EPA analysis using data from West et al.. 1989.
Page
10-30
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
of usual fish intake. These values were guided by the
values in the second column, except that frequency values
that were inconsistent with the ranges provided to
respondents in the survey were avoided.
Using the four seasonal fish eating frequencies
provided by respondents and the above conversions for
reported intake frequency, EPA estimated the average
number of fish meals per week for each respondent. This
estimate, as well as the analysis above, pertain to the total
number of fish meals eaten (in Michigan) regardless of the
source of the fish. Respondents were not asked to provide
a seasonal breakdown for eating frequency of
recreationally caught fish; rather, they provided an
overall estimate for the past year of the percent of fish
they ate that was obtained from different sources. EPA
estimated the annual frequency of recreationally caught
fish meals by multiplying the estimated total number of
fish meals by the reported percent of fish meals obtained
from recreational sources; recreational sources were
defined as either self caught or a gift from family or
friends.
The usual intake component of the survey did not
include questions about the usual portion size for fish
meals. In order to estimate usual fish intake, a portion
size of 8 oz. was applied (the majority of respondents
reported this meal size in the 7 day recall data).
Individual body weight data were used to estimate intake
on a g/kg-day basis. The fish intake distribution estimated
by EPA is displayed in Table 10-34.
The distribution shown in Table 10-34 is based on
respondents who consumed recreational caught fish. As
mentioned above, these represent 75 percent of all
respondents and 84 percent of respondents who reported
having fished in the prior year. Among this latter
population, the mean recreational fish intake rate is
14.4*0.84 = 12.1 g/day; the value of 38.7 g/day (95th
percentile among consumers) corresponds to the 95.8th
percentile of the fish intake distribution in this (fishing)
population.
The advantages of this data set and analysis are that
the survey was relatively large and contained both short-
term and usual intake data. The presence of short term
data allowed validation of the usual intake data which was
based on long term recall; thus, some of the problems
associated with surveys relying on long term recall are
mitigated here.
The response rate of this survey, 47 percent, was
relatively low. In addition, the usual fish intake
distribution generated here employed a constant fish meal
size, 8 oz.. Although use of this value as an average meal
size was validated by the short-term recall results, the use
of a constant meal size, even if correct on average, may
seriously reduce the variation in the estimated fish intake
distribution.
This study was conducted in the winter and spring
months of 1988. This period does not include the summer
months when peak fishing activity can be anticipated,
leading to the possibility that intake results based on the 7
day recall data may understate individuals' usual (annual
average) fish consumption. A second survey by West et
al. (1993) gathered diary data on fish intake for
respondents spaced over a full year. However, this later
survey did not include questions about usual fish intake
and has not been reanalyzed here. The mean recreational
fish intake rates derived from the short term and usual
components were quite similar, however, 14.0 versus 14.4
g/day.
Table 10-34. Distribution of Usual Fish Intake Among Survey Main Respondents
Who Fished and Consumed Recreationally Caught Fish
n
mean
10%
25%
50%
75%
90%
95% .
Source:
All Fish
Meals/Week
738
0.859
0.300
0.475
0.750
1.200
1.400
1.800
U.S. EPA analysis using
Recreational Fish
Meals/Week
738
0.447
0.040
0.125
0.338
0.672
1.050
1.200
data from West et al.
All Fish Intake
Erams/dav
738
27.74
9.69
15.34
24.21
38.74
45.20
58.11
. 1989.
Recreational
Fish Intake
Erams/dav
738
14.42
1.29
4.04
10.90
21.71
33.90
38.74
All Fish Intake
erams/ ka/tlav
726
0.353
0.119
0.187
0.315
0.478
0.634
0.747
Recreational
Fish Intake
Erams/ ka/dav
726
0.1806
0.0159
0.0504
0.1357
0.2676
0.4146
0.4920
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10-31
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
erW- Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Michigan Sport Anglers Fish Consumption Study,
1991-1992 - This survey, financed by the Michigan Great
Lakes Protection Fund, was a follow-up to the earlier
1989 Michigan survey described above. The major
prupose of 1991-1992 survey was to provide short-term
recall data of recreational fish consumption over a full
year period; the 1989 survey, in contrast, was conducted
over only a half year period (West et al., 1993).
This survey was similar in design to the 1989
Michigan survey. A sample of 7,000 persons with
Michigan fishing licenses was drawn and surveys were
mailed in 2-week cohorts over the period January, 1991 to
January, 1992. Respondents were asked to report detailed
fish consumption patterns during the preceding seven
days, as well as demographic information; they were also
asked if they currently eat fish. Enclosed with the survey
were pictures of about a half pound of fish. Respondents
were asked to indicate whether reported consumption at
each mpal was more, less or about the same as the
picture. Based on responses to this question, respondents
were assumed to have consumed 10, 5 or 8 ounces of fish,
respectively.
A total of 2,681 surveys were returned. West et al.
(1993) calculated a response rate for the survey of 46.8
percent; this was derived by removing from the sample
those respondents who could not be located or who did not
reside in Michigan for at least six months.
Of these 2,681 respondents, 2,475 (93 percent)
reported that they currently eat fish; all subsequent
analyses were restricted to the current fish eaters. The
mean fish consumption rates were found to be 16.7 g/day
for sport fish and 26.5 g/day for total fish (West et al.,
1993). Table 10-35 shows mean sport-fish consumption
rates by demographic categories. Rates were higher
among minorities, people with low income, and people
residing in smaller communities. Consumption rates in
Table 10-35. Mean Sport-Fish Consumption by Demographic Variables, Michigan Sport
Anglers Fish consumption Study, 1991-1992
Insorne*
$40,000
tiducation
Strtric High SctKXil
High Sclx>ol Degree
Some College-College Degree
Post. Grad
Residence Size'
Large City/Suburb (> 100,000)
Small City (20,000-100,000)
Town (2,000-20,000)
Small Town (100-2,000)
Rural, Non Farm
Farm
Age (years)
16-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60+
งcx'
Male
Female
Kacc/lithnieity*
Minority
While
1 l'< 01, F test
' P < .05. F test
Source: West et al., 1993
N
290
369
662
871
299
1,074
825
231
487
464
475
272
598
140
266
583
556
419
596
299
1,074
160
2.289
Mean (g/dav)
21.0
20.6
17.5
14.7
16.5
17.0
17.6
14.5
14.6
12.9
19.4
22.8
17.7
15.1
18.9
16.6
16.5
16.5
16.2
17.5
13.7
23.2
16.3
95% C.I.
16.3 - 25.8
15.5 - 25.7
15.0-20.1
12.8 - 16.7
12.9- 20.1
14.9-19.1
14.9 - 20.2
10.5 - 18.6
11.8- 17.3
10.7- 15.0
15.5 - 23.3
16.8 - 28.8
15.1-20.3
10.3 - 20.0
13.9 - 23.9
13.5 - 19.7
13.4 - 19.6
13.6- 19.4
13.8-18.6
15.8- 19.1
11.2- 16.3
13.4-33.1
14.9 - 17.6
Page
10-32
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
g/day were also higher in males than in females; however,
this difference would likely disappear if rates were
computed on a g/kg-day basis.
West et al. (1993) estimated the 80th percentile of the
survey fish consumption distribution. More extensive
percentile calculations were performed by U.S. EPA
(1995) using the raw data from the West et al. (1993)
survey and calculated 50th, 90th, and 95th percentiles.
However, since this survey only measured fish
consumption over a short (one week) interval, the
resulting distribution will not be indicative of the long-
term fish consumption distribution and the upper
percentiles reported from the EPA analysis will likely,
considerably overestimate the corresponding long term
percentiles. The overall 95th percentile calculated by
U.S. EPA (1995) was 77.9; this is about double the 95th
percentile estimated using year long consumption data
from the 1989 Michigan survey.
The limitations of this survey are the relatively low
response rate and the fact that only three cateogries were
used to assign fish portion size. The main study strengths
were its relatively large size and its reliance on short-term
recall.
Sportflsh Consumption Patterns of Lake Ontario
Anglers and the Relationship to Health Advisories, 1992 -
The objectives of this study were to provide accurate
estimates of fish consumption (overall and sport caught)
among Lake Ontario anglers and to evaluate the effect of
Lake Ontario health advisory recommendations (Connelly
et al., 19%). To target Lake Ontario anglers, a sample of
2,500 names was randomly drawn from 1990-1991 New
York fishing license records for licenses purchased in six
counties bordering Lake Ontario. Participation in the
study was solicited by mail with potential participants
encouraged to enroll in the study even if they fished
infrequently or consumed little or no sport caught fish.
The survey design involved three survey techniques
including a mail questionnaire asking for 12 month recall
of 1991 fishing trips and fish consumption, self-recording
information in a diary for 1992 fishing trips and fish
consumption, periodic telephone interviews to gather
information recorded in the diary and a final telephone
interview to determine awareness of health advisories
(Connelly etal., 1996).
Participants were instructed to record in the diary
the species of fish eaten, meal size, method by which fish
was acquired (sport-caught or other), fish preparation and
cooking techniques used and the number of household
members eating the meal. Fish meals were defined as
finfish only. Meal size was estimated by participants by
comparing their meal size to pictures of 8 oz. fish steaks
and fillets on dinner plates. An 8 oz. size was assumed
unless participants noted their meal size was smaller than
8 oz., in which case a 4 oz. size was assumed, or they
noted it was larger than 8 oz., in which case a 12 oz. size
was assumed. Participants were also asked to record
information on fishing trips to Lake Ontario and species
and length of any fish caught.
From the initial sample of 2,500 license buyers,
1,993 (80 percent) were reachable by phone or mail and
1,410 of these were eligible for the study, in that they
intended to fish Lake Ontario in 1992. A total of 1,202 of
these 1,410, or 85 percent, agreed to participate in the
study. Of the 1,202 participants, 853 either returned the
diary or provided diary information by telephone. Due to
changes in health advisories for Lake Ontario which
resulted in less Lake Ontario fishing in 1992, only 43
percent, or 366 of these 853 persons indicated that they
fished Lake Ontario during 1992. The study analyses
summarized below concerning fish consumption and Lake
Ontario fishing participation are based on these 366
persons.
Anglers who fished Lake Ontario reported an
average of 30.3 (S.E. = 2.3) fish meals per person from
all sources in 1992; of these meals 28 percent were sport
caught (Connelly et al., 1996). Less than 1 percent ate no
fish for the year and 16 percent ate no sport caught fish.
The mean fish intake rate from all sources was 17.9 g/day
and from sport caught sources was 4.9 g/day. Table 10-36
gives the distribution of fish intake rates from all sources
and from sport caught fish. The median rates were 14.1
g/day for all sources and 2.2 g/day for sport caught; the
95th percentiles were 42.3 g/day and 17.9 g/day for all
sources and sport caught, respectively. As seen in Table
10-37, statistically significant differences in intake rates
were seen across age and residence groups, with residents
of large cities and younger people having lower intake
rates on average.
The main advantage of this study is the diary
format. This format provides more accurate information
on fishing participation and fish consumption, than studies
based on 1 year recall (Ebert et al., 1993). However, a
considerable portion of diary respondents participated in
the study for only a portion of the year and some errors
may have been generated in extrapolating these
respondents' results to the entire year (Connelly et al.,
1996). In addition, the response rate for this study was
relatively low, 853 of 1,410 eligible respondents, or 60
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10-33
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
percent, which may have engendered some non-response
bias.
Table 10-36. Distribution of Fish Intake Rales
(from all sources and from sport -caught sources)
For 1992 Lake Ontario Anglers
PcrcenuIeofLakc
OrHitfio Anders
25%
5056
75%
90%
95%
Wi'
Sowcc Conncllvct al.
Fish from All Sources
(c/dav)
8.8
14.1
23.2
34.2
42.3
56.6
1996.
Sport-Caught Fish
(E/dav)
0.6
2.2
6.6
13.2
17.9
39.8
Table 10-37. Mean Annual Fish Consumption (g/day)
For Lake Ontario Anglers, 1992,
By Soeio-demographic Characteristics
Mean Consumption
Demographic Group
Fish from all Sources Sport-Caught Fish
Overall
Residence
Rural
Small City
City<25-100.000)
CHy<> 100.000)
Income
< S20.000
$21.000-34.000
S34.000-SO.OOO
>S50.000
Age
<30
30-39
40-49
50 +
Education
< High School
High School Grid
Some College
College Grad
Some Post Grad,
17.9
17.6
20.8
19.8
13.1
20.5
17.5
16.5
20.7
13.0
16.6
18.6
21.9
17.3
17.8
18.8
17.4
20.5
4.9
5.1
6.3
5.8
2.2
4.9
4.7
4.8
6.1
4.1
4.3
5.1
6.4
7.1
4.7
5.5
4.2
5.9
Note - Scheffe's test showed statistically significant differences between
residence types (for all sources and sport caught) and age groups (all
sources;.
Source: Conneilv et al.. 1996.
The presence of health advisories should be taken
into account when evaluating the intake rates observed in
this study. Nearly all respondents (>95 percent) were
aware of the Lake Ontario health advisory. This advisory
counseled to eat none of 9 fish species from Lake Ontario
and to eat no more than one meal per month of another 4
species. In addition, New York State issues a general
advisory to eat no more than 52 sport caught fish meals
per year. Among participants who fished Lake Ontario in
1992, 32 percent said they would eat more fish if health
advisories did not exist. A significant fraction of
respondents did not totally adhere to the fish advisory;
however, 36 percent of respondents, and 72 percent of
respondents reporting Lake Ontario fish consumption, ate
at least one species of fish over the advisory limit.
Interestingly, 90 percent of those violating the advisory
reported that they believed they were eating within
advisory limits.
10.7. RELEVANT FRESHWATER
RECREATIONAL STUDIES
Sport Fish Consumption arid Body Burden Levels of
Chlorinated Hydrocarbons: A Study of Wisconsin Anglers.
This survey, reported by Fiore et al. (1989), was
conducted to assess sociodemographic factors and sport
fishing habits of anglers, to evaluate anglers'
comprehension of and compliance with the Wisconsin Fish
Consumption Advisory, to measure body burden levels of
PCBs and DDE through analysis of blood serum samples
and to examine the relationship between body burden
levels and consumption of sport-caught fish. The survey
targeted all Wisconsin residents who had purchased
fishing or sporting licenses in 1984 in any of 10 pre-
selected study counties. These counties were chosen in
part based on their proximity to water bodies identified in
Wisconsin fish advisories. A total of 1,600 anglers were
sent survey questionnaires during the summer of 1985.
The survey questionnaire included questions about
fishing history, locations fished, species targeted,
kilograms caught for consumption, overall fish
consumption (including commercially caught) and
knowledge of fish advisories. The recall period was one
year,
A total of 801 surveys were returned (50 percent
response rate). Of these, 601 (75 percent) were from
males and 200 from females; the mean age was 37 years.
Fiore et al. (1989) reported that the mean number of fish
meals for 1984 for all respondents was 18 for sport-caught
meals and 24 for non-sport caught meals. Fiore et al.
(1989) assumed that each fish meal consisted of 8 ounces
(227 grams) of fish to generate means and percentiles of
fish intake. The reported per-capita intake rate of sport-
caught fish was 11.2 g/day; among consumers, who
comprised 91 percent of all respondents, the mean sport-
caught fish intake rate was 12.3 g/day and the 95th
percentile 37.3 g/day. The mean daily fish intake from all
sources (both sport caught and commercial) was 26.1
g/day with a 95th percentile of 63.4 g/day. The 95th
percentile of 37.3 g/day of sport caught fish represents 60
Page
10-34
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
fish meals per year; 63.4 g/day (the 95th percentile of
total fish intake) represents 102 fish meals per year.
Fiore et al. (1988) assumed a (constant) meal size
of 8 ounces (227 grams) of fish which may over-estimate
average meal size. Pao et al. (1982), using data from the
1977-78 USDA NFCS, reported an average fish meal size
of slightly less than 150 grams for adult males. EPA
obtained the raw data from this study and calculated the
distribution of the number of sport-caught fish meals and
the distribution of fish intake rates (using 150
grams/meal); these distributions are presented in Table
10-38. With this average meal size, the per-capita
estimate is 7.4 g/day.
Table 10-38. Percentile and Mean Intake Rates for
Wisconsin Sport Anglers
Percentile
Annual Number of
Sport Caught Meals
Intake Rate of Sport-
Caught Meals (g/dav)
25th '
50th
75th
90th
95th
98th
100th
Mean
4
10
25
50
60
100
365
18
1.7
4.1
10.2
20.6
24.6
41.1
150
7.4
Source: Raw data on sport-caught meals from Fiore et al.,
1989. EPA calculated intake rates using a value of
150 grams per fish meal; this value is dervied from
Paoetal.. 1982.
This study is limited in its ability to accurately
estimate intake rates because of the absence of data on
weight of fish consumed. Another limitation of this study
is that the results are based on one year recall, which may
tend to over-estimate the number of fishing trips (Ebert et
al., 1993). In addition, the response rate was rather low
(50 percent).
Effects of Health Advisory and Advisory Changes
on Fishing Habits and Fish Consumption in New York
Sport Fisheries - Connelly et al. (1992) conducted a study
to assess the awareness and knowledge of New York
anglers about fishing advisories and contaminants found in
fish and jtheir fishing and fish consuming behaviors. The
survey sample consisted of 2,000 anglers with New York
State fishing licenses for the year beginning October 1,
1990 through September 30, 1991. A questionnaire was
mailed to the survey sample in January, 1992. The
questionnaire was designed to measure catch and
consumption of fish, as well as methods of fish
preparation and knowledge of and attitudes towards health
advisories (Connelly et al. , 1992). The survey adjusted
response rate was 52.8 percent (1,030 questionnaires were
completed and 51 were not deliverable).
The average and median number of fishing days
per year were 27 and 15 days respectively (Connelly et
al. 1992). The mean number of sport-caught fish meals
was 11. About 25 percent of anglers reported that they
did not consume sport-caught fish.
Connelly et al. (1992) found that 80 percent of
anglers statewide did not eat listed species or ate them
within advisory limits and followed the 1 sport-caught fish
meal per week recommended maximum. The other 20
percent of anglers exceeded the advisory recommendations
in some way; 15 percent ate listed species above the limit
and 5 percent ate more than one sport caught meal per
week.
Connelly et al. (1992) found that respondents eating
more than one sport-caught meal per week were just as
likely as those eating less than one meal per week to know
the recommended level of sport-caught fish consumption,
although less than 1/3 in each group knew the level. An
estimated 85 percent of anglers were aware of the health
advisory. Over 50 percent of respondents said that they
made changes in their fishing or fish consumption
behaviors in response to health advisories.
The advisory included a section on methods that
can be used to reduce contaminant exposure. Respondents
were asked what methods they used for fish cleaning and
cooking. Summary results on preparation and cooking
methods are presented in Section 10.9 and in Appendix
10B.
A limitation of this study with respect to estimating
fish intake rates is that only the number of sport-caught
meals was ascertained, not the weight of fish consumed.
The fish meal data can be converted to an intake rate
(g/day) by assuming a value for a fish meal such as that
from Pao et al. (1982) (about 150 grams as the average
amount of fish consumed per eating occasion for adult
males - males comprised 88 percent of respondents in the
current study). Using 150 grams/meal the mean intake
rate among the angler population would be 4.5 g/day; note
that about 25 percent of this population reported no sport-
caught fish consumption.
The major focus of this study was not on
consumption, per se, but on the knowledge of and impact
of fish health advisories; Connelly et al. (1992) provides
important information on these issues.
Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, Inc. - Hudson
River Angler Survey - Hudson River Sloop Clearwater,
Inc. (1993) conducted a survey of adherence to fish
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10-35
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
consumption health advisories among Hudson River
anglers. All fishing has been banned on the upper Hudson
River, where high levels of PCB contamination are well
documented; while voluntary recreational fish
consumption advisories have been issued for areas south
of the Troy Dam (Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, Inc.,
1993).
The survey consisted of direct interviews with 336
shore-based anglers between the months of June and
November 1991, and April and July 1992. Socio-
demographic characteristics of the respondents are
presented in Table 10-39. The survey sites were selected
based on observations of use by anglers, and legal
accessibility. The selected sites included upper, mid-, and
lower Hudson River sites located in both rural and urban
settings. The interviews were conducted on weekends and
weekdays during morning, midday, and evening periods.
The anglers were asked specific questions concerning:
fishing and fish consumption habits; perceptions of
presence of contaminants in fish; perceptions of risks
associated with consumption of recreationally caught fish;
and awareness of, attitude toward, and response to fish
consumption advisories or fishing bans.
Table 10-39. Socio-Dcmographic Characteristics
of Respondents
Calceorv
Geographic Distribution
Age Distribution (years)
Annual Household Income
Ettuiic Background
Subcateeorv
Upper Hudson
Mid Hudson
Lower Hudson
< 14
15-29
30-44
45-59
>60
< $10,000
$10 - 29,999
$30 - 49,999
$50 - 69,999
$70 - 89,999
> $90,000
Caucasian American
African American
Hispanic American
Asian American
Native American
Percent of
Total1
18 %
35 %
48 %
3 %
26 %
35 %
23 %
12%
16 %
41 %
29 %
10%
2%
3%
67%
21 %
10%
1 %
1 %
1 A total of 336 shore-based anglers were interviewed
Source: Hudson River Sloop Clearwater. Inc.. 1993
Approximately 92 percent of the survey
respondents were male. The following statistics were
provided by Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, Inc. (1993).
The most common reason given for fishing was for
recreation or enjoyment. Over 58 percent of those
surveyed indicated that they eat their catch. Of those
anglers who eat their catch, 48 percent reported being
aware of advisories. Approximately 24 percent of those
who said they currently do not eat their catch, have done
so in the past. Anglers were more likely to eat their catch
from the lower Hudson areas where health advisories,
rather than fishing bans, have been issued. Approximately
94 percent of Hispanic Americans were likely to eat their
catch, while 77 percent of African Americans and 47
percent of Caucasian Americans intended to eat their
catch. Of those who eat their catch, 87 percent were
likely to share their meal with others (including women of
childbearing age, and children under the age of fifteen).
For subsistence anglers, more low-income than
upper income anglers eat their catch (Hudson River Sloop
Clearwater, Ine., 1993). Approximately 10 percent of the
respondents stated that food was their primary reason for
fishing; this group is more likely to be in the lowest per
capita income group (Hudson River Sloop Clearwater,
Inc., 1993).
The average frequency of fish consumption
reported was just under one (0.9) meal over the previous
week, and three meals over the previous month.
Approximately 35 percent of all anglers who eat their
catch exceeded the amounts recommended by the New
York State health advisories. Less than half (48 percent)
of all the anglers interviewed were aware of the State
health advisories or fishing bans. Only 42 percent of
those anglers aware of the advisories have changed their
fishing habits as a result. The advantages of this study
include: in-person interviews with 95 percent of all anglers
approached; field-tested questions designed to minimize
interviewer bias; and candid responses concerning
consumption of fish from contaminated waters. The
limitations of this study are that specific intake amounts
are not indicated, and that only shore-based anglers were
interviewed.
10.8. NATIVE AMERICAN FRESHWATER
STUDIES
Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission
(CRITFC) - A Fish Consumption Survey of the Umatilla,
Nez Perce, Yakama, and Warm Springs Tribes of the
Columbia River Basin - CRITFC (1994) conducted a fish
consumption survey among four Columbia River Basin
Indian tribes during the fall and winter of 1991-1992. The
target population included all adult tribal members who
lived on or near the Yakama, Warm Springs, Umatilla or
Page
10-36
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chanter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shsllfish
Nez Perce reservations. The survey was based on a
stratified random sampling design where respondents were
selected from patient registration files at the Indian Health
Service. Interviews were performed in person at a central
location on die member's reservation.
Information requested included annual and
seasonal numbers of fish meals, average serving size per
fish meal, species and part(s) of fish consumed,
preparation methods, changes in patterns of consumption
over the last 20 years and during ceremonies and festivals,
breast feeding practices and 24 hour dietary recall
(CRITFC, 1994). Foam sponge food models
approximating four, eight, and twelve ounce fish fillets
were provided to help respondents estimate average fish
meal size. Fish intake rates were calculated by
multiplying the annual frequency of fish meals by the
average serving size per fish meal.
The study was designed to give essentially equal
sample sizes for each tribe. However, since the
population sizes of the tribes were highly unequal it was
necessary to weight the data (in proportion to tribal
population size) in order that the survey results represent
the overall population of the four tribes. Such weights
were applied to the analysis of adults; however, because
the sample size for children was considered small, only an
unweighted analysis was performed for this population
(CRITFC, 1994).
The survey respondents consisted of 513 tribal
members, 18 years old and above. Of these, 58 percent
were female and 59 percent were under 40 years old. In
addition, information for 204 children 5 years old and less
was provided by the participating adult respondent. The
overall response rate was 69 percent.
The results of the survey showed that adults
consumed an average of 1.71 fish meals/ week and had an
average intake of 58.7 grams/day (CRITFC, 1994).
Table 10-40 shows the adult fish intake distribution; the
median was between 29 and 32 g/day and the 95th
percennle about 170 g/day. A small percentage (7 percent)
of respondents indicated that they were not fish
consumers. Table 10-41 shows that mean intake was
slighdy higher in males than females (63 g/d versus 56
g/d) and was higher in the over 60 years age group (74.4
g/d) than in the 18-39 years (57.6 g/d) or 40-59 years
(55.8 g/d) age group. Intake also tended to be higher
among those living on the reservation. The mean intake
for nursing mothers, 59.1 g/d, was similar to the overall
mean intake.
A total of 49 percent of respondents reported that
they caught fish from the Columbia River basin and its
tributaries for personal use or for tribal ceremonies and
distributions to other tribe members and 88 percent
reported drat they obtained fish from either self-
harvesting, family or friends, at tribal ceremonies or from
tribal distributions. Of all fish consumed, 41 percent came
-from self or family harvesting, 11 percent from the
harvest of friends, 35 percent from tribal ceremonies or
distribution, 9 percent from stores and 4 percent from
other sources (CRITFC, 1994).
Table 10-40. Number of Grams Per Day of Fish Consumed by
All Adult Respondents (Consumers and Non-consumers
Combined) - Throughout the Year
Number of
Grams/Day
0.00
1.6
3.2
4.0
4.9
6.5
7.3
8.1
9.7
12.2
13.0
16.2
19.4
20.2
24.3
29.2
32.4
38.9
40.5
48.6
N = 500
Weighted Mean
Weighted SE =
90th Percentile:
95th Percentile
99th Percentile
Cumulative
Percent
8.9%
9.0%
10.4%
10.8%
10.9%
12.8%
12.9%
13.7%
14.4%
14.9%
16.3%
22.8%
24.0%
24.1%
27.9%
28.1%
52.5%
52.9%
56.5%
67.6%
Number of
Grams/Dav
64.8
72.9
77.0
81.0
97.2
130
146
162
170
194
243
259
292
324
340
389
486
648
778
972
Cumulative
Percent
80.6%
81.2%
81.4%
83.3%
89.3%
92.2%
93.7%
94.4%
94.8%
97.2%
97.3%
97.4%
97.6%
98.3%
98.7%
99.0%
99.6%
99.7%
99.9%
100%
= 58.7 grams/day (gpd)
3.64
97.2 gpd <
= 170 gpd
= 389 gpd
(90th) < 130 gpd
Source: CRITFC. 1994
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10-37
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-41. Fish Imake Throughout the Year by Sex, Age, arid
Location by All Adult Respondents
Sec
l-cmalc
Male
Total
Age, (years;
18-39
40.59
60 & Older
Total
Location
On Reservation
Off Reservation
Total
Source; CRITFC.
N
278
222
500
287
155
58
500
440
60
500
1994.
Weighted Mean
(grams/day)
55.8
62.6
58.7
57.6
55.8
74.4
58.7
60.2
47.9
58.7
Weighted
SE
4.78
5.60
3.64
4.87
4.88
15.3
3.64
3.98
8.25
3.64
The analysis of seasonal intake showed that May
and June tended to be high consumption months and
December and January low consumption months. The
mean adult intake rate for May and June was 108 g/d
while the mean intake rate for December and January was
30.7 g/d. Salmon was the species eaten by the highest
number of respondents (92 percent) followed by trout (70
percent), lamprey (54 percent), and smelt (52 percent).
Table 10-42 gives the fish intake distribution for children
under 5 years of age. The mean intake rate was 19.6 g/d
and the 95th percentile was approximately 70 g/d.
The authors noted that some non-response bias may
have occured in the survey since respondents were more
likely to live near the reservation and were more likely to
be female than non-respondents. In addition, they
hypothesized that non fish consumers may have been more
likely to be non-respondents than fish consumers since non
consumers may have thought their contribution to the
survey would be meaningless; if such were the case, this
study would ovestimate the mean intake rate. It was also
noted that the timing of the survey, which was conducted
during low fish consumption months, may have led to
underestimation of actual fish consumption; the authors
conjectured that an individual may report higher annual
consumption if interviewed during a relatively high
consumption month and lower annual consumption if
interviewed during a relatively low consumption month.
Finally, with respect to children's intake, it was observed
that some of the respondents provided the same
information for their children as for themselves, thereby
the reliability of some of these data is questioned.
Although the authors have noted these limitations,
this study does present information on fish consumption
Table 10-42.
Children's Fish Consumption Rates
- Throughout Year
Number of Grams/Day Unweighted Cumulative Percent
0.0
0.4
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.2
4.1
4.9
6.5
8.1
9.7
12.2
13.0
16.2
19.4
20.3
24.3
32.4
48.6
64.8
72.9
81.0
97.2
162.0
N = 194
Unweighted Mean =
Unweighted SE = 1
Source: CRITFC,
21.1%
21.6%
22.2%
24.7%
25.3%
28.4%
32.0%
33.5%
35.6%
47.4%
48.5%
51.0%
51.5%
72.7%
73.2%
74.2%
76.3%
87.1%
91.2%
94.3%
96.4%
97.4%
98.5%
100%
19.6 grams/day (god)
94
1994.
patterns and habits for a Native American subpopulation.
It should be noted that the number of surveys that address
subsistence subpopulations is very limited.
Wolfe and Walker - Subsistence Economies in
Alaska: Productivity, Geography, and Development
Impacts - Wolfe and Walker (1987) analyzed a dataset
from 98 communities for harvests of fish, land mammals,
marine mammals, and other wild resources. The analysis
was performed to evaluate the distribution and productivity
of subsistence harvests in Alaska during the 1980s.
Harvest levels were used as a measure of productivity.
Wolfe and Walker (1987) defined harvest to represent a
single year's production from a complete seasonal round.
The harvest levels were derived primarily from a
compilation of data from subsistence studies conducted
between 1980 to 1985 by various researchers in the Alaska
Department of Fish and Game, Division of Subsistence.
Of the 98 communities studied, four were large
urban population centers and 94 were small communities.
The harvests for these latter 94 communities were
documented through detailed retrospective interviews with
harvesters from a sample of households (Wolfe and
Page
10-38
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Walker, 1987). Harvesters were asked to estimate the
quantities of a particular species that were harvested and
used by members of that household during the previous
12-month period. Wolfe and Walker (1987) converted
harvests to a common unit for comparison, pounds
dressed weight per capita per year, by multiplying the
harvests of households within each community by standard
factors converting total pounds to dressed weight,
summing across households, and then dividing by the total
number of household members in the household sample.
Dressed weight varied by species and community but in
general was 70 to 75 percent of total fish weight; dressed
weight for fish represents that portion brought into the
kitchen for use (Wolfe and Walker, 1987).
Harvests for the four urban populations were
developed from a statewide data set gathered by the
Alaska Department of Fish and Game Divisions of Game
and Sports Fish. Urban sport fish harvest estimates were
derived from a survey that was mailed to a randomly
selected statewide sample of anglers (Wolfe and Walker,
1987). Sport fish harvests were disaggregated by urban
residency and the dataset was analyzed by converting the
harvests into pounds and dividing by the 1983 urban
population.
For the overall analysis, each of the 98
communities was treated as a single unit of analysis and
the entire group of communities was assumed to be a
sample of all communities in Alaska (Wolfe and Walker,
1987). Each community was given equal weight,
regardless of population size. Annual per capita harvests
were calculated for each community. For the four urban
centers, fish harvests ranged from 5 to 21 pounds per
capita per year (6.2 g/day to 26.2 g/day).
The range for the 94 small communities was 25 to
1,239 pounds per capita per year (31 g/day to 1,541
g/day), For these 94 communities, the median per capita
fish harvest was 130 pounds per year (162 g/day). In
most (68 percent) of the 98 communities analyzed,
resource harvests for fish were greater than the harvests
of the other wildlife categories (land mammal, marine
mammal, and other) combined.
The communities in this study were not made up
entirely of Alaska Natives. For roughly half the
communities, Alaska Natives comprised 80 percent or
more of the population, but for about 40 percent of the
communities they comprised less than 50 percent of the
population. Wolfe and Walker (1987) performed a
regression analysis which showed that the per capita
harvest of a community tended to increase as a function of
the percentage of Alaska Natives in the community.
Although this analysis was done for total harvest (i.e.,
fish, land mammal, marine mammal and others) the same
result should hold for fish harvest since fish harvest is
highly correlated with total harvest.
A limitation of this report is that it presents (per-
capita) harvest rates as opposed to individual intake rates.
Wolfe and Walker (1987) compared the per capita harvest
rates reported to the results for the household component
of the 1977-1978 USDA National Food Consumption
Survey (NFCS). The NFCS showed that about 222
pounds of meat, fish, and poultry were purchased and
brought into the household kitchen for each person each
year in the western region of the United States. This
contrasts with a median total resource harvest of 260
Ibs/yr in the 94 communities studied. This comparison,
and the fact that Wolfe and Walker (1987) state that
"harvests represent that portion brought into the kitchen
for use", suggest that the same factors used to convert
household consumption rates in the NFCS to individual
intake rates can be used to convert per capita harvest rates
to individual intake rates. In Section 10.3, a factor of 0.5
was used to convert fish consumption from household to
individual intake rates. Applying this factor, the median
per capita individual fish intake in the 94 communities
would be 81 g/day and the range 15.5 to 770 g/day.
A limitation of this study is that the data were based
on 1-year recall from a mailed survey. An advantage of
the study is that it is one of the few studies that present
fish harvest patterns for subsistence populations.
Fish PCB Concentrations and Consumption
Patterns Among Mohawk Women at Akwesasne -
Akwesasne is a native American community of ten
thousand plus persoas located along the St. Lawrence
River (Fitzgerald et al., 1995). The local food chain has
been contaminated with PCBs and some species have
levels that exceed the U.S. FDA tolerance limits for
human consumption (Fitzgerald et al., 1995). Fitzgerald
et al. (1995) conducted a recall study from 1986 to 1992
to determine the fish consumption patterns among nursing
Mohawk women residing near three industrial sites. The
study sample consisted of 97 Mohawk women and 154
nursing Caucasian controls. The Mohawk mothers were
significantly younger (mean age 24.9) than the controls
(mean age 26.4) and had significantly more years of
education (mean 13.1 for Mohawks versus 12.4 for
controls). A total of 97 out of 119 Mohawk nursing
women responded, a response rate of 78 percent; 154 out
of 287 control nursing Caucasian women responded, a
response rate of 54 percent.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10-39
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Potential participants were identified prior to, or
shortly after, delivery. The interviews were conducted at
home within one month postpartum and were structured to
collect information for sociodemographics, vital statistics,
use of medications, occupational and residential histories,
behavioral patterns (cigarette smoking and alcohol
consumption), drinking water source, diet, and fish
preparation methods (Fitzgerald et al., 1995). The dietary
data collected were based on recall for food intake during
tlie index pregnancy, the year before the pregnancy, and
more than one year before the pregnancy.
The dietary assessment involved the report by each
participant on the consumption of various foods with
emphasis on local species of fish and game (Fitzgerald et
al., 1995). This method combined food frequency and
dietary histories to estimate usual intake. Food frequency
was evaluated with a checklist of foods for indicating the
amount of consumption of a participant per week, month
or year. Information gathered for the dietary history
included duration of consumption, changes in the diet, and
food preparation method.
Table 10-43 presents the number of local fish meals
per year for both the Mohawk and control participants.
The highest percentage of participants reported consuming
between 1 and 9 local fish meals per year. Table 10-43
indicates that Mohawk respondents consumed statistically
significantly more local fish than did control respondents
during the two time periods prior to pregnancy; for
thetime period during pregnancy there was no significant
difference in fish consumption between the two groups.
Table 10-44 presents the mean number of local fish meals
consumed per year by time period for all respondents and
for those ever consuming (consumers only). A total of 82
(85 percent) Mohawk mothers and 72 (47 percent) control
mothers reported ever consuming local fish. The mean
number of local fish meals consumed per year by Mohawk
respondents declined over time, from 23.4 (over one year
before pregnancy) to 9.2 (less than one year before
pregnancy) to 3.9 (during pregnancy); a similar decline
was seen among consuming Mohawks only. There was
also a decreasing trend over time in consumption among
controls, though it was much less pronounced.
Table 10-45 presents the mean number of fish
meals consumed per year for all participants by time
period and selected characteristics (age, education,
cigarette smoking, and alcohol consumption). Participants
over 34 years of age had the highest fish consumption.
The most common fish consumed by Mohawk mothers
was yellow perch; for controls the most common fish
consumed was trout.
An advantage of this study is that it presents data
for fish consumption patterns for Native Americans as
compared to a demographically similar group of
Caucasians. Although the data are based on nursing
mothers as participants, the study also captures
consumption patterns prior to pregnancy (up to 1 year
before and more than 1 year before). Fitzgerald et al.
(1995) noted that dietary recall for a period more than one
year before pregnancy may be inaccurate, but this data
was the best available measure of the more distant past.
They also noted that the observed decrease in fish
consumption among Mohawks from the period one year
before pregnancy to the period of pregnancy is due to a
secular trend of declining fish consumption over time in
Mohawks. This decrease, which was more pronounced
than that seen in controls, may be due to health advisories
Table 1CM3. Number of Local Fish Meals Consumed Per Year by Time Period for all Respondents
Time Period
Number of Local Fish Z^.rfng Pregnancy
Meals Consumed Per -SB*
Year Mohawk Control
rf % N5 %
None
1-9
10- 19
20-29
30-39
40-49
50+
Toinl
k
a
Source
63 64.9
24 24.7
5 5.2
1 1.0
0 0.0
0 0.0
4 4.1
97 100.0
[i <0.05 for Mohawk vs. Control.
p <0 001 for Mohawk vs. Control.
N s number of respondents.
Pteeerald ct al.. 1995.
109
24
7
5
2
1
6
154
70.8
15.6
4.5
3.3
1.3
0.6
3.9
100.0
si Yr. Before Pregnancy"
Mohawk Control
NF % tf %
42
40
4
3
0
1
7
97
43.3
41.2
4.1
3.1
0.0
1.0
7.2
100.0
99
31
6
3
3
1
11
154
64.3
20.1
3.9
1.9
1.9
0.6
7.1
100.0
> Yr. Before Pregnancy*
Mohawk Control
Nฐ % NF %
20
42
6
9
1
1
18
97
20.6
43.3
6.2
9.3
1.0
1.0
18.6
100.0
93
35
8
5
1
1
11
154
60.4
22.7
5.2
3.3
0.6
0.6
7.1
100.0
Page
10-40
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
'Table 10-44. Mean Number of Local Fish Meals Consumed Per Year by Time Period for all Respondents and Consumers Only
All Respondents
(N=97 Mohawks and 154 Controls)
During si Yr. Before
Pregnancy Pregnancy
Mohawk 3.9(1.2) 9.2(2.3)
Control 7.3(2.1) 10.7(2.6)
> 1 Yr. Before
Pregnancy
23.4 (4.3)"
10.9 (2.7)
Consumers Only
(N=82 Mohawks and 72 Controls)
During si Yr. Before >lYr. Before
Pregnancy Pregnancy Pregnancy
4.6(1.3) 10.9(2.7) 27.6(4.9)
15.5(4.2)" 23.0(5.1)' 23.0(5.5)
1 p< 0.05 for Mohawk vs. Control
b p < 0.001 for Mohawk vs. Control.
( ) standard error.
Test for linear trend:
p<0.001 for Mohawk (All participants and consumers only);
i p=0.07 for Controls (All participants and consumers only).
Source- Fitzgerald et al . 1995.
Table 10-45. Mean Number of Local Fish Meals Consumed Per Year by Time Period and Selected Characteristics for all Respondents
Time Period
During Pregnancy
Background Variable Mohawk
Control
s 1 Year Before Pregnancy
Mohawk
Control
> 1 Year Before Pregnancy
Mohawk
Control
Age(Yrs)
<20
20-24
25-29
30-34
>34
7.7
1.3
3.9
12.0
1.8
0.8
5.9
9.9
7.6
11.2
13.5
5.7
15.5
9.5
1.8
13.9
14.5
6.2
2.9
26.2
27.4
20.4
25.1
12.0
52.3
10.4
15.9
5.4
5.6
22,1'
Education (Yrs)
<12
12
13- 15
>15
6.3
7.3
1.7
0.9
7.9
5.4
10.1
6.8
14.8
8.1
8.0
10.7
12.4
8.4
15.4
0.8
24.7
15.3
29.2
18.7
8.6
11.4
13.3
2.1
Cigarette Smoking
Yes
No
3.8
3.9
8.8
6.4
10.4
8.4
13.0
8.3
31.6
18.1
10.9
10.8
Alcohol Consumption
ป
*
c
d
Yes
No
F(4,149) =
F (1,152) =
F (1,152) =
F (1,152) =
4.2
3.8
9.9
6.3b
6.8
12.1
13.8
4.T
18.0
29.8
14.8
2.9'*
2.66, p=0.035 for Age Among Controls.
3.77, p=0.054 for Alcohol
5.20, p=0.024 for Alcohol
Among Controls.
Among Controls.
6.42, p=0.012 for Alcohol Among Controls.
Source: Fitzgerald et al.. 1995.
promulgated by tribal, as well as state, officials. The
authors rote that this decreasing secular trend in Mohawks
is consistent with a survey from 1979-1980 that found an
overall mean of 40 fish meals per year among male and
female Mohawk adults.
The data are presented as number of fish meals per
year; the authors did not assign an average weight to fish
meals. If assessors wanted to estimate the weight of fish
consumed some average value of weight per fish meal
would have to be assumed. Pao et al. (1982) reported 104
grams as the average weight of fish consumed per eating
occasion for females 19-34 years old.
Peterson et al. (1994) - Fish Consumption Patterns
and Blood Mercury Levels in Wisconsin Chippewa Indians
- Peterson et al. (1994) investigated the extent of exposure
of methylmercury to Chippewa Indians living on a
Northern Wisconsin reservation who consume fish caught
in northern Wisconsin lakes. The lakes in northern
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10-41
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Wisconsin are known to be contaminated with mercury
and the Chippewa have a reputation for high fish
consumption (Peterson et al., 1994). The Chippewa
Indians fish by the traditional method of spearfishing.
Spearfishing (for walleye) occurs for about two weeks
each spring after the ice breaks, and although only a small
number of tribal members participate in it, the
spearfishing harvest is distributed widely within the tribe
by an informal distribution network of family and friends
and through traditional tribal feasts (Peterson et al., 1994).
Potential survey participants, 465 adults, 18 years of
age and older, were randomly selected from the tribal
registries (Peterson et al., 1994). Participants Were asked
to complete a questionnaire describing their routine fish
consumption and, more extensively, their fish
consumption during the two previous months. They were
also asked to give a blood sample that would be tested for
mercury content. The survey was carried out in May
1990. A follow-up survey was conducted for a random
sample of 75 non-respondents (80 percent were
reachable), and their demographic and fish consumption
patterns were obtained. Peterson et al. (1994) reported
that the non-respondents' socioeconomic and fish
consumption were similar to the respondents.
A total of 175 of the original random sample (38
percent) participated in the study. In addition, 152
nonrandomly selected participants were surveyed and
included in the data analysis; these participants were
reported by Peterson et al. (1994) to have fish
Consumption rates similar to those of the randomly
selected participants. Results from the survey showed that
fish consumption varied seasonally, with 50 percent of the
respondents reporting April and May (spearfishing season)
as the highest fish consumption months (Peterson et al.,
1994). Table 10-46 shows the number of fish meals
consumed per week during the last 2 months (recent
consumption) before the survey was conducted and during
the respondents' peak consumption months grouped by
gender, age, education, and employment level. During
peak consumption months, males consumed more fish (1.9
meals per week) than females (1.5 meals per week),
respondents under 35 consumed more fish (1.8 meals per
week) than respondents 35 and over (1.6 meals per week),
and the unemployed consumed more fish (1.9 meals per
week) than the employed (1.6 meals per week). During
the highest fish consumption season (April and May), 50
percent of respondents reported eating one or less fish
meals per week and only 2 percent reported daily fish
consumption (Figures 10-1 and 10-2). A total of 72
percent of respondents reported Walleye consumption in
the previous two months. Peterson et al. (1994) also
reported that the mean number of fish meals usually
consumed per week by the respondents was 1.2.
The mean fish consumption rate reported (1.2 fish
meals per week, or 62.4 meals per year) in this survey
was compared with the rate reported in a previous survey
of Wisconsin anglers (Fiore et al., 1989) of 42 fish meals
per year. These results indicate that the Chippewa Indians
Table 10-46. Sociodemographic Factors and Recent Fish Consumption
All participants (N-323)
Gender
Male (n-148)
Female (n-175)
Agc(y)
<35 (n-150)
*35 (n-173)
High School Graduate
No (n-105)
Yes (n-218)
Unemployed
Yes (n-78)
No Cn-245)
Peak Consumption8
Average0
1.7
1.9
1.5
1.8
1.6
1.6
1.7
1.9
1.6
*3d(%)
20
26
15
23
17
18
21
27
18
Walleve
4.2
5.1
3.4
5.3"
3.2
3.6
4.4
4.8
4.0
Recent Consumptionb
N. Pike
0.3
0.5"
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.2
0.4
0.6
03
Muskellunee
0.3
0.5
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.2
0.6
0 2
Bass
0.5
0.7"
0.3
0.7
0.3
0.7
0.4
1.1
03
* Highest number of fish meals consumed/week.
Number of meals of each species
c Average peak fish consumption.
in tile previous
2 niontlis.
11 Percentage of population reporting peak fish consumption of ^3
Source' Peterson et al., 1994.
fish meals/week.
Page
10-42
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Source: Peterson etal., 1994.
Which months of the year do you
eat the most fish?
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Month
Participants could list more than one month.
Figure 10-1. Sesonal Fish Consumption: Wisconsin Chippewa, 1990
during those months of the year when you eat the most fish,
how many fish meats do you eat in a week?
Figure 10-2. Peak Fish Consumption: Wisconsin Chippewa, 1990.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10-43
-------
^1
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
do not consume much more fish than the general
Wisconsin angler population (Peterson et al., 1994). The
differences in the two values may be attributed to
differences in study methodology (Peterson et al., 1994).
Note that this number (1.2 fish meals per week) includes
fish from all sources. Peterson et al. (1994) noted that
subsistence fishing, defined as fishing as a major food
source, appears rare among the Chippewa. Using die rate
from Pao et al. (1982) of 117 g/meal as the average
weight of fish consumed per fish meal in die general
population, the rate reported here of 1.2 fish meals per
week translates into a mean fish intake rate of 20 g/day in
this population.
AlHC (1994) - Exposure Factors Sourcebook - The
Exposure Factors Sourcebook (AIHC, 1994) provides data
for non-marine fish intake consistent widi this document.
However, the total fish intake rate recommended in AIHC
(1994) is approximately 40 percent lower dian drat in this
document. The fish intake rates presented in diis
handbook are based on more recent data from USDA
CSFII (1989-1991). AIHC (1994) presents probability
distributions in grams fish per kilogram of body weight
for fish consumption based on data from U.S. EPA
Guidance Manual, Assessing Human Healdi Risks from
Chemically Contaminated Fish and Shellfish. The ฉRisk
formula is provided for direct use in the ฉRisk simulation
software. The ฉRisk formula was provided for die
distributions that were provided for die ingestion of
freshwater finfish, saltwater finfish, and fish (unspecified)
in die U.S. general population, children ages 1 to 6 years,
and males ages 13 years and above. Distributions were
also provided for saltwater finfish ingestion in the general
population and for females and for males 13 years of age
and older. Distributions for shellfish ingestion were
provided for the general population, children ages 1 to 6
years, and for males and females 13 years of age and
above. Additionally, distributions for "unspecified" fish
ingestion were presented for die above mentioned
populations.
The Sourcebook has been classified as a relevant
rather dian key study because it was not the primary
source fo rthe data used to make recommendations in this
document. The Sourcebook is very similar to dais
document in the sense that it summarizes exposure
factor data and recommends values. Therefore, it
can be used as an alternative information source on
fish intake.
10.9 OTHER FACTORS
Other factors to consider when using die available
survey data include location, climate, season, and ethnicity
of the angler or consumer population, as well as die parts
of fish consumed and the methods of preparation. Some
contaminants (for example, some dioxin compounds) have
the affinity to accumulate more in certain tissues, such as
the fatty tissue, as well as in certain internal organs. The
effects of cooking methods for various food products on
the levels of dioxin-like compounds have been addressed
by evaluating a number of studies in U.S. EPA (1996).
These studies showed various results for contamination
losses based on die mediodology of die study and die
method of food preparation. The reader is referred to
U.S. EPA (1996) for a detailed review of these studies.
In addition, some studies suggest dial mere is a significant
decrease of contaminants in cooked fish when compared
with raw fish (San Diego County, 1990). Several studies
cited in tiiis section have addressed fish preparation
methods and parts of fish consumed. Table 10-47
provides summary results from these studies on fish
preparation methods; further details on preparation
methods, as well as results from some studies on parts of
fish consumed, are presented in Appendix 10B.
The moisture content (percent) and total fat content
(percent) measured and/or calculated in various fish forms
(i.e., raw, cooked, smoked, etc.) for selected fish species
are presented in Table 10-48, based on data from USDA
(1979-1984). The total percent fat content is based on die
sum of saturated, monounsaturated, and polyunsaturated
fat. The moisture content is based on die percent of water
present.
In some cases, die residue levels of contaminants in
fish are reported as the concentration of contaminant per
gram of fat. When using residue levels, the assessor
should ensure consistency in die exposure assessment
calculations by using consumption rates that are based on
die amount of fat consumed for die fish species of
interest. Alternately, residue levels for die "as consumed"
portions of fish may be estimated by multiplying die levels
based on fat by die fraction of fat (Table 10-48) per
product as follows:
esidue leveA I g-fat \
g-fat / ^ g-product/
(Eqn. 10-4)
Page
10-44
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II- Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-47.
Use
Study Frequency
Connelly et al., Always
1992 Ever
Connelly et al., Always
1996 Ever
CRITFC, 1994 At least
monthly
Ever
Fitzgerald etal., Not
1995 Specified
Puffer etal., As Primary
1981 , Method
24 and 75 listed as bake, BBQ,
" Dried
* Roasted
d Canned
Percentage of Individuals
Bake
24(a)
75(a)
13
84
79
98
16.3
or poach
Pan
Fry
51
88
4
72
51
80
94(e)(f)
52.5
Using Various Cooking Methods at Specified Frequencies
Deep Broil or
Fry Grill Poach Boil
13 24(a)
59 75(a)
4
42
14 " ' 27 11 46
25 39 17 73
71(e)(g)
12
Smoke Raw Other
31 1 34(b)
29(c)
49(d)
66 3 67(b)
71(c)
75(d)
0.25 19(h)
' Not specified whether deep or pan fried
' Mohawk women
* Control population
* boil. stew. SOUD. or steam
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10-45
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-48.
Species
Anchovy. European
Bass
Bass, Striped
Blucfish
Butlcrfish
Carp
Catfish
Cod, Atlantic
Cod, Pacific
Croaker, Atlantic
Dolphinfish, Mahimahi
Drum, Freshwater
Flatfish, Flounder and Sole
Grouper
Haddock
Halibut, Atlantic & Pacific
Halibut, Greenland
Herring, Atlantic & Turbot, domestic species
Herring, Pacific
Mackerel, Atlantic
Mackerel, Jack
Mackerel, King
Mackerel, Pacific & Jack
Mackerel, Spanish
Monkfish
Mullet, Striped
Ocean Perch, Atlantic
Perch, Mixed species
Pike, Northern
Pike, Walleve
Percent Moisture and Fat Content for Selected Species'
Moisture
Content
f%)
73.37
50.30
75.66
79.22
70.86
74.13
76.31
69.63
76.39
58.81
81.22
75.61
75.92
16.14
81.28
78.03
59.76
77.55
77.33
79.06
73.16
79.22
73.36
79.92
74.25
71.48
77.92
71.69
70.27
72.05
64.16
59.70
55.22
71.52
63.55
53.27
69.17
75.85
70.15
71.67
68.46
83.24
77.01
70.52
78.70
72.69
79.13
73.25
78.92
72.97
79,31
Total Fat Content
(%?
FINFISH
4.101
8.535
3.273
1.951
3.768
NA
4.842
6.208
3.597
12.224
0.456
0.582
0.584
1.608
0.407
2.701
11.713
0.474
4.463
0.845
1.084
0.756
0.970
0.489
0.627
0.651
1.812
2.324
12.164
7.909
10.140
10.822
16.007
12.552
9.076
15.482
4.587
1.587
6.816
5.097
5.745
NA
2.909
3.730
1.296
1.661
0.705
0.904
0.477
0.611
0.990
Comments
Raw
Canned in oil, drained solids
Freshwater, mixed, species, raw
Raw
Raw
Raw
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Channel, raw
Channel, cooked, breaded and fried
Atlantic, raw
Canned, solids and liquids
Cooked, dry heat
Dried and salted
Raw
Raw
Cooked, breaded and fried
Raw
Raw
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Raw, mixed species
Cooked, dry heat
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Smoked
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Raw
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Kippered
Pickled
Raw
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Canned, drained solids
Raw
Canned, drained solids
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Raw
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Raw
Page
10-46
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-48.
Species
Pollock, Alaska & Walleye
Pollock, Atlantic
Rockfish, Pacific, mixed species
Roughy, Orange
Salmon, Atlantic
Salmon, Chinook
Salmon, Chum
Salmon, Coho
Salmon, Pink
Salmon, Red & Sockeye
Sardine, Atlantic
Sardine, Pacific
Sea Bass, mixed species
Seatrout, mixed species
Shad, American
Shark, mixed species
Snapper, mixed species
Sole, Spot
Sturgeon, mixed species
Sucker, white
Sunfish, Pumpkinseed
Swordfish
Trout, mixed species
Trout, Rainbow
Tuna, light meat
Tuna, white meat
Tuna, Bluefish, fresh
Turbot, European
Whitefish, mixed species
Whiting, mixed species
Yellowtail. mixed species
Percent Moisture and Fat Content for Selected Species' (continued)
Moisture
Content
(%) '
81.56
74.06
78.18
79.26
73.41
75.90
68.50
73.17
72.00
75.38
70.77
72.63
65.35
76.35
68.81
70.24
68.72
61.84
59.61
68.30
78.27
72.14
78.09
68.19
73.58
60.09
76.87
70.35
75.95
76.55
69.94
62.50
79.71
79.50
75.62
68.75
71.42
71.48
63.43
59.83
74.51
64.02
69.48
68.09
59.09
76.95
72.77
70.83
80.27
74.71
74.52
Total Fat
Content
(%)'
0.701
0.929
0.730
1.182
1.515
3.630
5.625
9.061
3.947
3.279
4.922
4.908
6.213
2.845
5.391
4.560
6.697
9.616
10.545
11.054
1.678
2.152
2.618
NA
3.941
12.841
0.995
1.275
3.870
3.544
4.544
3.829
1.965
0.502
3.564
4.569
5.901
2.883
3.696
7.368
0.730
NA
. 2.220
4.296
5.509
NA
,5.051
0.799
0.948
1.216
NA
Comments
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Raw
Raw (Mixed species)
Cooked, dry heat (mixed species)
Raw
Raw
Raw
Smoked
Raw
Canned, drained solids with bone
Raw , . .
Cooked, moist heat
Raw
Canned, solids with bone and liquid
Raw
Canned, drained solids with bone
Cooked, dry heat
Canned in oil, drained solids with bone
Canned in tomato sauce, drained solids with bone
Cooked, dry heat
Raw
Raw
Raw
Raw
Cooked, batter-dipped and fried
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Raw
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Smoked
Raw
Raw
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Raw
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Canned in oil, drained solids
Canned in water, drained solids
Canned in oil
Canned in water, drained solids
Raw .
Cooked, dry heat
Raw
Raw
Smoked
Raw
Cooked, dry heat
Raw
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10-47
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-48. Percent Moisture and Fat Content for Selected Species' (continued)
Species
Moisture
Content
(%)
Total Pat
Content
(%)ป
Comments
SHELLFISH
Crab, Alaska King
Crab, Blue
Crab, Dungcness
Crab, Queen
Crayfish, mixed species
Lobster, Northern
Slirimp, mixed species
Spiny Lobster, mixed species
Clam, mixed species
Mussel, Dluc
Octopus, common
Oyster, Eastern
Oyster, Pacific
Scallop, mixed species
Squid
79.57
77.55
79.02
79.16
77.43
71.00
79.18
80.58
80.79
75.37
76.76
76.03
75.86
72.56
52.86
77.28
74.07
81.82
63.64
97.70
61.55
63.64
80.58
61.15
80.25
85.14
85.14
64.72
70.28
82:06
78.57
58.44
73.82
78.55,
64.54
NA
0.854
0.801
0.910
1.188
6.571
0.616
0.821
0.732
0.939
NA
0.358
1.250
1.421
10.984
0.926
1.102
0.456
0.912
NA
10.098
0.912
1.538
3.076
0.628
1.620
1.620
11.212
3.240
1.752
0.377
10.023
NA
0.989
6.763
Raw
Cooked, moist heat
Imitation, made from surimi
Raw
Canned (dry pack or drained solids of wet pack)
Cooked, moist heat
Crab cakes
Raw
Raw
Raw
Cooked, moist heat
Raw
Cooked, moist heat
Raw
Canned (dry pack or drained solids of wet pack)
Cooked, breaded and fried
Cooked, moist heat
Imitation made from surimi, raw
Raw
Canned, drained solids
Canned, liquid
Cooked, breaded and fried
Cooked, moist heat
Raw
Cooked, moist heat
Raw
Raw
Canned (Solids and liquid based) raw
Cooked, breaded and fried
Cooked, moist heat
Raw
Raw
Cooked, breaded and fried
Imitation, made from Surimi
Raw
Cooked, fried
' Data arc reported as is in the Handbook
k Total Fat Content - saturated,
NA - Not available
Source: USDA 1979-1984 - U.S.
monosaturated and polyunsaturated
Agricultural Handbook No. 8
Page
10-48
Exposure Factors Handbook
' August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
The resulting residue levels may then be used in
conjunction with "as consumed" consumption rates.
Additionally, intake rates may be reported in terms
of units as consumed or units of dry weight. It is essential
that exposure assessors be aware of this difference so that
they may ensure consistency between the units used for
intake rates and those used for concentration data (i.e., if
the unit of food consumption is grams dry weight/day,
then the unit for the amount of pollutant in the food should
be grams dry weight). If necessary, as consumed intake
rates may be converted to dry weight intake rates using the
moisture content percentages of fish presented in
Table 10-48 and the following equation:
[(loo-wyiooj
(Eqn. 10-5)
"Dry weight" intake rates may be converted to "as
consumed" rates by using:
where:
W
/[(100-W)/100]
= dry weight intake rate;
= as consumed intake rate; and
= percent water content.
(Eqn. 10-6)
10.10. RECOMMENDATIONS
The survey designs, data generated, and
limitations/advantages of the studies described in this
report are summarized and presented in Table 10-49
(found at the end of this chapter). Fish consumption rates
are recommended based on the survey results presented in
the key studies described in the preceding sections.
Considerable variation exists in the mean and upper
percentile fish consumption rates obtained from these
studies: This can be attributed largely to the
characteristics of the survey population (i.e., general
population, recreational anglers) and the type of water
body (i.e., marine, estuarine, freshwater), but other
factors such as study design, method of data collection and
geographic location also play a role. Based on these
study variations, recommendations for consumption rates
were classified into the following categories:
General Population;
Recreational Marine Anglers;
Recreational Freshwater Anglers; and
Native American Subsistence Fishing
Populations
The recommendations for each of these categories
were rated according to die level of confidence the Agency
has in the recommended values. These ratings were
derived according to the principles outlined in Volume I,
Section 1.3; the ratings and a summary of the rationale
behind them are presented in tables which follow the
discussion of each category.
For exposure assessment purposes, the selection of
the appropriate category (or categories) from above will
depend on the exposure scenario being evaluated.
Assessors should use the recommended values (or range
of values) unless specific studies are felt to be particularly
relevant to their needs, in which case results from a
specific study or studies may be used. This is particularly
true for the last two categories where no nationwide key
studies exist. Even where national data exist, it may be
advantageous to use regional estimates if the assessment
targets a particular region. In addition, seasonal, age, and
gender variations should be considered when appropriate.
It should be noted that the recommended rates are
based on mean (or median) values which represent a
typical intake or central tendency for the population
studied, and on upper estimates (i.e., 90th-99th
percentiles) which represent the high-end fish consumption
of the population studied. For the recreational angler
populations, the recommended means and percentiles are
based on all persons engaged in recreational fishing, not
just those consuming recreationally caught fish.
10.10.1. Recommendations - General Population
The key study for estimating mean fish intake
(reflective of both short-term and long-term consumption)
is the USDA CSFII1989-1991. The recommended values
for mean intake by habitat and fish type are shown below.
The confidence in recommendations is presented in Table
10-50 (found at the end of this chapter).
For all fish (finfish and shellfish) the values are 6.6
g/day for freshwater/estuarine fish, 13.5 g/day for marine
fish and 20.1 g/day for all fish. Note these values are in
terms of uncooked fish weight. Because the CSFII was
based on short-term data, however, it could not be used to
estimate the distribution over the long term of average
daily fish intake. The long-term average daily fish intake
distribution can be estimated using the TRI study which
provided dietary data for a one month period. However,
because the data from this study are now over 20 years
old, it was felt that the distribution generated from these
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996 __^
Page
10-49
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Recommendations - General Population
Mean Intake
(g/day)
95th Percentile of Long-term
Intake Distribution (g/day)
Study (Reference)
20.1 (Total Fish)
13.5 (Marine Fish)
6.6 (Freshwater/Estuarine Fish)
63 (Value of 42 from Javitz was
adjusted upward by 50 percent to
account for recent increase in fish
consumption)
TRI (Javitz, 1980; Ruffle et al.
1994)
U.S. EPA Analysis of CSFII,
1989-91
data should be adjusted to account for the recent increase
in fish consumption. The CSFII estimate of per capita
intake, 20.1 g/day, is about 50 percent higher than the
per-capita intake from the TRI study (13.4 g/day). Then,
as suggested by Ruffle et al. (1994) the distributions
generated from TRI should be shifted upward by 50
percent to estimate the current fish intake distribution.
Thus, the recommended percentiles of long-term average
daily fish intake are those of Javitz (1980) adjusted 50
percent upward (see Tables 10-3, 10-4). Alternatively,
the log-normal distribution of Ruffle et al. (1994) (Table
10ซ6) may be used to approximate the long term fish
intake distribution; adjusting the log mean p. by adding
logd .5) = 0.4 to it will shift the distribution upward by 50
percent.
The distribution of serving sizes may be useful for
acute exposure assessments. The recommended values
are 123 g/day for mean serving size and 305 g/day for the
95th percentile serving size (i.e., the midpoints of the
values below).
10.10.2. Recommendations - Recreational Marine
Anglers
The recommended values presented below are
based on the surveys of the National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS). The intake values are based on finfish
consumption only. The confidence rating for recreational
marine anglers is presented in Table 10-51 (found at the
end of this chapter).
Recommendations - General Population - Fish Serving Size
Mean Intake (grams)
95th Percentile (grams)
Study (Reference)
117
129
284
326
1977-78 MFCS (Pao et al., 1982)
1989-1991 CSFII (U.S. EPA, 1996)
Recommendations - Recreational Marine Anglers
Mean Intake
(g/day)
95th Percentile
(g/day)
Study Location
Study
5.6
7.2
2.0
18.0
26.0
6.8
Atlantic
Gulf
Pacific
NMFS, 1993
Page
10-50
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
10.10.3. Recommendations - Recreational
Freshwater Anglers
The data presented below are based on mailed
questionnaire surveys (Ebert et al., 1993 and West et al.,
1989; 1993) and a diary study (Connelly et al., 1992).
The mean intakes ranged from 5-17 g/day. In two
from the West et al. (1993) study. Confidence in fish
intake recommendations for recreational freshwater fish
consumption is presented in Table 10-52 (found at the end
of this chapter).
10.10.4. Recommendations - Native American
Recommendations - Freshwater Anglers
Mean Intake
(g/day)
5
5
12
17
Upper Percentile
(g/day)
13 (95th percentile)
18(95thpercentile)
39 (96th percentile)
Study Location
Maine
New York
Michigan
Michigan
Reference
Ebert etal., 1992
Connelly etal., 1996
West et al, 1989
West et al, 1993
relevant studies, (Connelly et al., 1992 and Fiore et al.,
1989) only the number of fish meals was ascertained.
Using average meal sizes taken from Pao et. al. (1982) to
calculate intake rates for these studies gives mean rates
similar to those reported above (4.5 g/day and 7.4 g/day).
The recommended mean and 95th percentile values for
recreational freshwater anglers are 8 g/clay and 25 g/day,
respectively; these were derived by averaging the values
from the three populations surveyed in the key studies.
Since the two West et al. surveys studied the same
population, the average of the means from the two studies
was used to represent the mean for this population. The
estimate from the West et al. (1989) survey was used to
represent the 95th percentile for this population since the
long term consumption percentiles could not be estimated
Subsistence Populations
Fish consumption data for Native American
subsistence populations are very limited. The CRITFC
(1994) study gives a per-capita fish intake rate of 59 g/day
and a 95th percentile of 170 g/day. The report by Wolfe
and Walker (1987) presents harvest rates for 94 small
communities engaged in subsistence harvests of natural
resources. A factor of 0.5 was employed to convert the
per-capita harvest rates presented in Wolfe and Walker to
per capita individual consumption rates; this is the same
factor used to convert from per capita household
consumption rates to per capita individual consumption
rates in the analysis of homegrown fish consumption from
the 1987-1988 MFCS. Based on this factor, the median
Recommendations - Native American Subsistence Populations
Per-Capita (or Mean)
Intake (g/dav)
59
16
81
770
Upper Percentile
(e/dav)
170 (95th)
Study Population
4 Columbia River Tribes
94 Alaska Communities
(Lowest of 94)
94 Alaska Communities
(Median of 94)
94 Alaska Communities
(Highest of 94)
Reference
CRITFC, 1994
Wolfe and Walker 1989
Wolfe and Walker 1989
Wolfe and Walker 1989
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10-51
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
per-capita harvest in the 94 communities of 162 g/day
(and the range of 31-1,540 g/day) is converted to the
median per capita intake rate of 81 g/day (range 16-770
g/day) shown in the table below. The recommended value
for mean intake is 70 g/day and the recommended 95th
percentile is 170 g/day. The confidence in ratings are
presented in Table 10-53 (found at the end of this
chapter).
It should be emphasized that the above
recommendations refer only to Native American
subsistence fishing populations, not the Native American
population generally. Several studies show that intake
rates of recreationally caught fish among Native
American; with state fishing licences (West et al., 1989;
Ebert et al., 1993) are somewhat higher (50-100 percent)
than intake rates among other anglers, but far lower than
the above rates shown for Native American subsistence
populations.
In addition, the studies of Peterson et al. (1994)
and Fiore et al. (1989) show that total fish intake among
a Native American population on a reservation (Chippewa
in Wisconsin) is roughly comparable (50 percent higher)
to total fish intake among licensed anglers in the same
state, and the study of Fitzgerald et al. (1995) showed that
pregnant women on a reservation (Mohawk in New York)
have sport-caught fish intake rates comparable to those of
a local white control population.
10.11 REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 10
American Industrial Hygiene Council (AIHC) (1994)
Exposure factors sourcebook. AIHC, Washington,
DC.
ChemRisk (1991) Consumption of freshwater fish by
maine anglers. Portland, ME: ChemRisk.
Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission
(CRIFTQ. (1994) A fish consumption survey of
the Umatilla, Nez Perce, Yakama and Warm
Springs tribes of the Columbia River Basin.
Technical Report 94-3. Portland, OR: CRIFTC.
Connelly, N.A.; Brown, T.L.; Knuth, B.A. (1990)
New York statewide angler survey 1988. New
York State Department of Environmental
Conservation, Bureau of Fisheries.
Connelly, N.A.; Knuth, B.A.; Bisogni, C.A. (1992)
Effects of the health advisory changes on fishing
habits and fish consumption in New York sport
fisheries. Human Dimension Research Unit,
Department of Natural Resources, New York State
College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Fernow
Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. Report for
the New York Sea Grant Institute Project No.
R/FHD-2-PD. September.
Connelly, N.A.; Knuth, B.A.; Brown, T.L. (1996)
Sportfish consumption patterns of Lake Ontario
anglers (In press with N. Am. J. Fisheries
Management).
Ebert, E.; Harrington, N.; Boyle, K.; Knight, J.;
Keenan, R. (1993) Estimating consumption of
freshwater fish among Maine anglers. North Am.
J. Fisheries Management 13:737-745.
Fiore, B.J.; Anderson, H.A.; Hanrahan, L.P.; Olsen,
L.J.;Sonzogni, W.C. (1989) Sportfish
consumption and body burden levels of chlorinated
hydrocarbons: A study of Wisconsin anglers.
Arch. Environ. Health 44:82-88.
Fitzgerald, E.; Hwang, S.A.; Briz, K.A.; Bush, B.;
Cook, K.; Worswick, P. (1995) Fish PCS
concentrations and consumption patterns among
Mohawk women at Akwesasne. J. Exp. Anal.
Environ. Epid. 5(1): 1-19.
Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, Inc. (1993) Hudson
River angler survey. Hudson River Sloop
Clearwater, Inc., Poughkeepsie, NY.
Javitz, H. (1980) Seafood consumption data analysis.
SRI International. Final report prepared for EPA
Office of Water Regulations and Standards. EPA
Contract 68-01-3887.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). (1986a)
Fisheries of the United States, 1985. Current
Fisheries Statistics No. 8368. U.S. Department of
Commerce. National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). (1986b)
National Marine Fisheries Service. Marine
Recreational Fishery Statistics Survey, Atlantic and
Gulf Coasts, 1985. Current Fisheries Statistics No.
8327. U.S. Department of Commerce, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). (1986c)
National Marine Fisheries Service. Marine
Recreational Fishery Statistics Survey, Pacific
Coast. Current Fisheries Statistics No. 8328. U.S.
Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). (1993)
Data tapes for the 1993 NMFS provided to U.S.
EPA, National Center for Environmental
Assessments.
Page
10-52
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Pao, E.M.; Fleming, K.H.; Guenther, P.M.; Mickle,
S.J. (1982) Foods commonly eaten by individuals:
amount per day and per eating occasion. U. S.
Department of Agriculture. Home Economics
Report No. 44.
Peterson, D.; Kanarek, M.; Kuykendall, M.; Diedrich,
J.; Anderson, H.; Remington, P.; Sheffy, T.
(1994) Fish consumption patterns and blood
mercury levels in Wisconsin Chippewa Indians.
Archives. Environ. Health, 49:53-58.
Pierce, R.S.; Noviello, D.T.; Rogers, S.H. (1981)
Commencement Bay seafood consumption report.
Preliminary report. Tacoma, WA: Tacoma-Pierce
County Health Department.
Price, P.; Su, S.; Gray, M. (1994) The effects of
sampling bias on estimates of angler consumption
rates in creel surveys. Portland, ME: ChemRisk.
Puffer, H.W., Azen, S.P.; Duda, M.J.; Young, D.R.
(1981) Consumption rates of potentially hazardous
marine fish caught in the metropolitan Los Angeles
area. EPA Grant #R807 120010.
Ruffle, B.; Burmaster, D.; Anderson, P.; Gordon, D.
(1994) Lognormal distributions for fish
consumption by the general U.S. population. Risk
Analysis 14(4): 395-404.
Rupp, E.;Miler, F.L.;Baes, C.F. HI. (1980) Some
results of recent surveys of fish and shellfish
consumption by age and region of U.S. residents.
Health Physics 39:165-175.
San Diego County (1990) San Diego Bay health risk
study. San Diego, CA. San Diego County
Department of Health Services.
Tsang, A.M.; Klepeis, N.E. (1996) Results tables
from a detailed analysis of the National Human
Activity Pattern Survey (NHAPS) response. Draft
Report prepared for the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency by Lockheed Martin, Contract
No. 68-W6-001, Delivery Order No. 13.
USDA. (1979-1984) Agricultural Handbook No. 8.
USDA: (1989-1991) Continuing Survey of Food
Intakes by Individuals (CSFII). U.S. Department
of Agriculture.
USDA. (1992a) Changes in food consumption and
expenditures in American households during the
1980's. U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Washington, D.C. Statistical Bulletin No. 849.
USDA. (1992b) U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Human Nutrition Information Service. Food and
nutrient intakes by individuals in the United States,
1 day, 1987-88: Nationwide Food Consumption
Survey 1987-88, NFCS Rpt. No. 87-1-1, in
preparation.
U.S. DHHS. (1995) Final Report: Health study to
assess the human health effects of mercury
exposure to fish consumed from the Everglades.
Prepared by the Florida Department of Health and
Rehabilitative Services for the U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services, Atlanta, Georgia.
PB95-167276.
U.S. EPA. (1989) Exposure factors handbook. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Health
and Environmental Assessment, Washington, DC.
U.S. EPA. (1992) Consumption surveys for fish and
shellfish; a review and analysis of survey methods.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Water. EPA 822/R-92-001.
U.S. EPA. (1995) Fish consumption estimates based
on the 1991-92 Michigan sport anglers fish
consumption study. Final Report. Prepared by
SAIC for the Office of Science and Technology.
U.S. EPA. (1996) Estimating exposure to dioxin-like
compounds. (Draft). Office of Research and
Development, National Center for Environmental
Assessment
West, P.C.; Fly, M.J.; Marans, R.; Larkin, F. (1989)
Michigan sport anglers fish consumption survey. A
report to the Michigan Toxic Substance Control
Commission. Michigan Department of
Management and Budget Contract No. 87-20141.
West, P.C.; Fly, J.M.; Marans, R.; Larkin, F.;
Rosenblatt, D. (1993) 1991-92 Michigan sport
anglers fish consumption study. Prepared by the
University of Michigan, School of Natural
Resources for the Michigan Department of Natural
Resources, Ann Arbor, MI. Technical Report No.
6. May.
Wolfe, R.J.; Walker, R.J. (1987) Subsistence
economics in Alaska: productivity, geography, and
development impacts. Arctic Anthropology
24(2):56-81.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10-53
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
I
a
1
B
sj
si
(N 0!
S g
= a,
' ง
1!
to S
00 &>
m. ง
^ oa
II
: 2
S g
2 a
s-
X
s
I
3.
r
< s
Q o
s
.S3
" W>
I-
ซiS
Du
Page
10-54
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
g is i |-.Q i $
S B ง & ฃ S ง
30.SS.S5.SRS i 5S
ซ . 3
. . ซ
i^s
r.a s
ifr
: = B
a
sS f
g ซ
ซ S JS
. ฃ .ฃ3
.ฃ3 ซJ -
.f ts
f
tL,
S
a
i
$
SB
g B
gg
ง-|S-3r
I IB 5
II
III
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10-55
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
ll
aง
o C
*-|
8
ง _ .
Jo'
.iff
I'.lH
il|f-ง
*** g c5 ca o
-a J5 oa t3 c
&ซ=
II
S !งa
a S S?
co >>w
ง1-
1 a f .
K-
fid
II
IS S S S
II
|f -5
-s
5
S
I s-
o o
Hi
:O^ ai
SP GO
t OV -Q .
' .
tS'
ii
II
J
ill I
.a i -o
8ฃ ง ซ
S 12 a 1
s|2^^1| |aaa
M-S^oIsS waloJ
I
-
ฐ Ij
I 5.
Is.
SS ซ^H o ฃ1 c?\ ป-< ^ cS
2 S oo D- -5 c ซ
Is til
eg1 fi ^ s
.sfs S a
Szfe.3
g
_. I- ป
P! =52-ฐ
Wil
! Li Bll
ซj
S.
5 a a a 5 =s
^s -a Hi
i -s
ss
i!
ป&
1 8
?Sis?ซ
I Hi
% ~ 8 . t c
-S8.1|l
i'S.
i-ss
S
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-50. Confidence in Fish Intake Recommendations for General Population
Considerations
Rationale
Rating
Study Elements
Level of peer review
Accessibility
Reproducibility
Focus on factor of interest
Data pertinent to U.S.
Primary data
Currency
Adequacy of data collection period
Validity of approach
Study size
Representativeness of the population
Characterization of variability
Lack of bias in study design (high
rating is desirable)
Measurement error
Other Elements
Number of studies
Agreement between researchers
Overall Rating
USDA and EPA review
Yes
U.S. studies
Yes
Studies from 1973-1974 to 1989-1991
Long-term distribution based on one month data
collection period
Diaries and one-day recall
Range 10,000 -37,000
Representative of overall U.S. population.
Long-term distribution (generated from 1973-
1974 data) was shifted upward based on recent
increase in mean consumption.
Response rates fairly high; no obvious source of
bias.
Estimates of intake amounts imprecise
1 for mean, 2 for serving size distribution, results
of 2 studies utilized for long-term distribution
High
High
High
High
High (Mean, Serving-size
Distribution)
Low (Long-Term Distribution)
High (Mean, Serving-size
Distribution)
Medium (Long-term distribution)
High
High
High
Medium
High
Medium
Medium
Medium
High (Mean, Serving-size
distribution)
Medium (Long-term distribution)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10-57
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-51. Confidence in Fish Intake Recommendations for Recreational Marine Anglers
Considerations
Rationale
Rating
Study Elements
Level of peer review
Accessibility
Rcproducihility
Pocus on factor of interest
Data pertinent to U.S.
Primary data
Currency
Adequacy of data collection period
Validity of approach
Study size
Representativeness of tltc population
Cliaracterizalion of variability
Lack of bias in study design (high
rating is desirable)
Measurement error
Other Elements
Number of studies
Agreement between researchers
Overall Rating
NMFS and EPA review High
Details in Handbook and NMFS publications
See above High
Focus on fish catch rather than fish consumption per se. Medium
U.S. studies High
Yes High
Data from 1993 High
Data collected once for each angler. Yearly catch of angler Medium
estimated from catch on intercepted trip and reported fishing
frequency.
Creel survey provided data on fishing frequency and fish Medium
weight; telephone survey provided number of anglers. Average
value used for number of intended fish consumers and edible
fraction.
Over 100,000 High
Representative of overall U.S. coastal state population. High
Distributions generated High
Response rates fairly high; no obvious source of bias. High
Fish were weighed in field High
1 Low
N/A
Medium
Page
10-58
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-52. Confidence in Recommendations for Fish Consumption - Recreational Freshwater
Considerations
Study Elements
Level of peer review
Accessibility
Reproducibility
Focus on factor of interest
Data pertinent to U.S.
Primary data
Currency
Adequacy of data collection period
Validity of approach
Study size
Representativeness of the population
Characterization of variability
Lack of bias in study design (high
rating is desirable)
Measurement error
Other Elements
Number of studies
Agreement between researchers
Overall Rating
Rationale
Peer reviewed journals and EPA review
Original study analyses reported in accessible journals.
Subsequent EPA analyses detailed in Handbook.
'See above
Yes
U.S. studies
Yes
Studies range from 1988-1992
Data for one year period collected for 3 studies; one week
period for one study.
One year recall of fishing trips (2 studies), one week recall of
fish consumption (1 study), and one year diary survey (1
study). Weight of fish consumed estimated using approximate
weight of fish catch and edible fraction or approximate weight
of fish meal.
800-2600
Each study localized to a single state.
Distributions generated
Response rates fairly high. One year recall of fishing trips
may result in overestimate.
Weight of fish portions estimated in one study, fish weight
estimated from reported fish length in another.
4
Rates in different pans of country may be expected to show
some variation.
Main drawback is studies are not nationally representative.
Rating
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
Medium
High
Low
High
Medium
Medium
High
Medium
Medium
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10-59
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chanter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10-53. Confidence in Recommendations for Native American Subsistence Fish Consumption
Considerations
Rationale
Rating
Study Elements
Level of peer review
Accessibility
Rcproducibility
Focus on factor of interest
Data pertinent to U.S.
Primary data
Currency
Adequacy of data collection period
Validity of approach
Study size
Representativeness of the population
Characterization of variability
Lack of bias in study design (high
rating is desirable)
Measurement error
Other Elements
Number of studies
Agreement between researchers
Overall tinting
Peer reviewed journal (1 study), technical report Medium
(Istudy)
See above Medium
Studies adequately detailed High
Yes High
U.S. studies High
One study used primary data, the other secondary data Medium
Data from early 1980's to 1992. Medium
Data for one year period collected. High
One study used fish harvest data; EPA used factor to Medium
convert to individual intake. Other study measured
individual intake directly.
500 for study with primary data Medium
Only two states represented. Low
Individual variation not described in summary study Medium
Response rate 69% in study with primary data. Bias Medium
hard to evaluate in summary study.
Weight of fish estimated Medium
2; only one study described individual variation in intake Medium
Range of per-capita rates from summary study includes
pcr-capila rate from study with primary data.
Studies are not nationally representative. Upper
percentiles based on only one study.
High
Medium (per capita intake)
Low (upper percentiles)
Page
10-60
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10- Intake of Fish and Shellfish
APPENDIX 10A
RESOURCE UTILIZATION DISTRIBUTION
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10A-1
-------
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Appendix 10A. Resource Utilization Distribution
For any quantity Y that is consumed by individuals in a population, the percentiles of the "resource utilization
distribution" of Y can be formally defined as follows: Yp (R) is the pth percentile of the resource utilization distribution
if p percent of the overall consumption of Y in the population is done by individuals with consumption below Yp (R) and
100-p percent is done by individuals with consumption above YP(R).
The percentiles of the resource utilization distribution of Y are to be distinguished from the percentiles of the
(standard) distribution of Y. The latter percentiles show what percentage of individuals in the population are consuming
below a given level. Thus, the 50th percentile of the distribution of Y is that level such that 50 percent of individuals
consume below it; on the other hand, the 50th percentile of the resource utilization distribution is that level such that 50
percent of the overall consumption in the population is done by individuals consuming below it.
The percentiles of the resource utilization distribution of Y will always be greater than or equal to the corresponding
percentiles of the (standard) distribution of Y, and, in the case of recreational fish consumption, usually considerably
exceed the standard percentiles.
To generate the resource utilization distribution, one simply weights each observation in the data set by the Y level
for that observation and performs a standard percentile analysis of weighted data. If the data already have weights, then
one multiplies the original weights by the Y level for that observation, and then performs the percentile analysis.'
Under certain assumptions, the resource utilization percentiles of fish consumption may be related (approximately)
to the (standard) percentiles of fish consumption derived from the analysis of creel studies. In this instance, it is assumed
that the creel survey data analysis did not employ sampling weights (i.e., weights were implicijly set to one); this is the
case .for many of the published analyses of creel survey data. In creel studies the fish consumption rate for the ith
individual is usually derived by multiplying the amount of fish consumption per fishing trip (say Q) by the frequency
of fishing (say f,). If it is assumed that the probability of sampling of an angler is proportional to fishing frequency, then
sampling weights of inverse fishing frequency (I/ f;) should be employed in the analysis of the survey data. Above it
was stated that for data that are already weighted the resource utilization distribution is generated by multiplying the
original weights by the individual's fish consumption level to create new weights. Thus, to generate die resource
utilization distribution from the data with weights of (I/ f,), one multiplies (I/ Q by the fish consumption level of f
Q to get new weights of Q. '
Now if Q (amount of consumption per fishing trip) is constant over the population, then these new weights are
constant and can be taken to be one. But weights of one is what (it is assumed) were used in the original creel survey
data analysis. Hence, the resource utilization distribution is exactly the same as the original (standard) distribution
derived from the creel survey using constant weights.
The accuracy of this approximation of the resource utilization distribution of fish by the (standard) distribution of
fish consumption derived from an unweighted analysis of creel survey data depends then on two factors, how
approximately constant the Q ls are in the population and how approximately proportional the relationship between
sampling probability and fishing frequency is. Sampling probability will be roughly proportional to frequency if repeated
sampling at the same site is limited or if re-interviewing is performed independent of past interviewing status.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10A-3
-------
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
APPENDIX 10B
FISH PREPARATION AND COOKING METHODS
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
lOB-1
-------
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10B-1. Percent of Fish Meals Prepared Using Various Cooking Methods by Residence Size'
Residence Size
Cooking Method
Pan Fried
Deep Fried
Boiled
Grilled/Broiled
Baked
Combination
Other (Smoked, etc.)
Don't Know
Total (N)>
Pan Fried
Deep Fried
Boiled
Grilled/Broiled
Baked
Combination
Other (smoked, etc.)
Don't Know
Total (N)
Large
City/Suburb
32.7
19.6
6.0
23.6
12.4
2.5
3.2
0.0000
393
45.8
12.2
2.8
20.2
11.8
2.7
4.5
0
205
Large City = over 100,000; Small City
* N = Total number of respondents
Source: West el al.. 1993
Small City
31.0
24.0
3.0
20.8
12.4
6.0
2.8
0.0000
317
45.7
14.5
2.3
17.6
8.8
8.5
2.7
0
171
Town
Total Fish
36.0
23.3
3.4
13.8
10.0
8.3
5.2
0.0000
388
Sport Fish
47.6
17.5
2.9
10.6
6.3
10.4
4.9
0
257
Small Town
32.4
24.7
3.7
21.4
10.3
5.0
1.9
0.5
256
41.4
15.2
0.5
25.3
8.7
6.7
1.5
0.7
176
= 20,000-100,000; Town = 2,000-20,000; Small Town =
Rural Non-
Farm
38.6
26.2
3.4
13.7
12.7
2.3
2.9
0.2
483
51.2
21.9
3.6
8.2
9.7
1.9
3.5
0
314
100-2,000.
Farm
51.6
15.7
3.5
13.1
6.4
7.0
1.8
94
63.3
7.3
0
10.4
6.9
9.3
2.8
0
62
Table 10B-2. Percent of Fish Meals Prepared
Age (years)
Cooking Method
Pan Fried
Deep Fried
Boiled :
Grilled or Boiled
Baked
Combination
Other (Smoked, etc.)
Don't Know
Total (N)1
Pan Fried
Deep Fried
Boiled
Grilled/Broiled
Baked
Combination
Other (Smoked, etc.)
Don't Know
Total (N)
' N = Total number of respondents.
Source: Westetal.. 1993.
17-30
45.9
23.0
0.0000
15.6
10.8
3.1
1.6
0.0000
246
57.6
18.2
0.0000
15.0
3.6
3.8
1.7
0.0000
174
31-40
Total Fish
31.7
24.7
6.0
15.2
13.0
5.2
4.2
0.0000
448
Sport Fish
42.6
21.0
4.4
10:1
10.4
7.2
4.3
0.0000
287
Using Various Cooking
41-50
30.5
26.9
3.6
24.3
8.7
2.2
3.5
0.3
417
43.4
17.3
0.8
25.9
6.4
3.0
3.2
0.0000
246
51-64
33.9
23.7
3.9
16.1
12.8
6.5
2.7
0.4
502
46.6
14.8
3.2
12.2
11.7
7.5
3.5
0.4
294
40.7
14.0
4.3
18.8
11.5
6.8
4.0
0.0000
287
54.1
7.7
3.1
12.2
9.9
8.2
4.8
0.0000
163
Overall
35.3
23.5
3.9
17.8
11.4
4.7
3.2
0.2
1946
47.9
16.5
2.4
14.8
8 0
o.y
5.9
3.5
0.1
1187
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10B-3
-------
T|
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10B-3
Utluiicity
Cooking Method
Pan Fried
Deep Fried
Boiled
Grilled/Broiled
Baked
Combination
Other (Smoked, etc.)
Don't Know
Total (N)'
Pan Fried
Deep Fried
Boiled
Grilled/Broiled
Baked
Combination
Other (Smoked, etc.)
Total (N)
1 N = Total number of respondents.
Source: West et ai.. 1993.
. Percent of Fish Meals Prepared Using Various Cooking Methods by Ethnicity
Black
40.5
27.0
0
19.4
1.9
9.5
1.6
0
52
44.9
36.2
0
0
5.3
13.6
0
19
Native American
Total Fish
37.5
22.0
1.1
9.8
16.3
6.2
4.2
0
84
Sport Fish
47.9
20.2
0
1.5
18.2
8.6
3.6
60
Hispanic
16.1
83.9
0
0
0
0
3.5
0.3
12
52.1
47.9
0
Q
0
0
0
4
White
35.8
22.7
4.3
17.7
11.7
4.5
2.7
0.4
1,744
48.8
15.7
2.7
14.7
8.6
5.6
3.7
39
Other
18.5
18.4
0
57.6
5.4
0
4.0
0
33
22.0
9.6
0
61.9
6.4
0
0
0
Table 10B-4. Percent of Fish Meals Preapred Using Various Cooking Methods by Education
Education Through Some H.S.
Cooking Method
Pan Fried
Deep Fried
Boiled
Grilled/Broiled
Baked
Combination
Other (Smoked, etc.)
Don't Know
Total (N)'
Pan Fried
Deep Fried
Boiled
Grilled/Baked
Baked
Combination
Other (Smoked, etc.)
Don't Know
Total (N)
X m Total number of respondents.
StKirec' West cl a!.. 1993.
44.7
23.6
2.2
8.9
8.1
10.0
2.1
0.5
236
56.1
13.6
2.8
6.3
7.4
10.1
2.8
0.8
146
H.S. Degree
Total Fish
41.8
23.6
2.8
10.9
12.1
5.1
3.4
0.3
775
Sport Fish
52.4
15.8
2.4
9.4
10.6
6.3
3.3
0
524
College Degree
28.8
23.8
5.1
23.8
11.6
3.0
4.0
0
704
41.8
18.6
3.0
21.7
6.1
3.9
4.6
0
421
Post Graduate
Education
22.9
19.4
5.8
34.1
12.8
3.8
1.3
0
211
36.3
12.9
0
28.3
14.9
6.5
1.0
0
91
Page
10B-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factory
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10B-5. Percent of Fish Meals Prepared Using Various Cooking Methods by Income
Income
Cooking Method
Pan Fried
Deep Fried
Boiled
Grilled/Broiled
Baked
Combination
Other (Smoked, etc.)
Don't Know
Total (N)1
Pan Fried
Deep Fried
Boiled
Grilled/Broiled
Baked
Combination
Other (Smoked, etc.)
Don't Know
Total (N)
1 N = Total number of respondents.
Source: West et al.. 1993.
0 - $24,999
Total Fish
44.8
21.7
2.1
11.3
9.1
8.7
2.4
0
544
Sport Fish
51.5
15.8
1.8
12.0
7.2
9.1
2.7
0
387
$25,000-539,999
39.1
22.2
3.5
15.8
12.3
2.9
4.0
0.2
518
51.4
15.8
2.1
12.2
10.0
3.8
4.6
0
344
$40,000 - or more
26.5
23.4
5.6
25.0
13.3
2.5
3.5
OJ
714
42.0
17.2
3.7
19.4
10.0
3.5
3.8
0.3
369
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10B-5
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10B-6. Percent of Fish Meals where Fat was Trimmed or Skin was Removed, by Demographic Variables
Population
Residence Size
Large City/Suburb
Small City
Town
Small Town
Rural Non-Farm
Farm
Age (years)
17-30
31-40
41-50
51,65
Over 65
Ethnicity
Black
Native American
Hispanic
White
Other
Education
Some H.S.
H.S. Degree
College Degree
Posl-Graduatc
Income
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
Table 10B-7. Method of Cooking of Most Common Species Kept by Sportfishermen
Species
White Croaker
Pacific Mackerel
Pacific Bonito
Queenfish
Jacksmclt
Walleye Perch
Shiner Perch
Opaleye
Black Perch
Kelp Bass
California Halibut
Shellfish'
(n = 1059)
1 Crab, mussels, lobster,
* Boil, soup, steam, stew
Percent of Anglers
Catching Species
34%
25%
18%
17%
13%
10%
7%
6%
5%
5%
4%
3%
abalone
Use as Primary Cooking Method (Percent)
Deep Fry
19%
10%
5%
15%
17%
12%
11%
16%
18%
12%
13%
0%
Pan Fry
64%
41%
33%
70%
57%
69%
72%
56%
53%
55%
60%
0%
Bake and Charcoal Broil Raw
12% , 0%
28% 0%
43% 2%
6% 1%
19% 0%
6% 0%
8% 0%
14% 0%
14% 0%
21% 0%
24% 0%
0% 0%
Other"
5%
21%
17%
8%
7%
13%
11%
14%
15%
12%
3%
1005?
Source: Modified from Puffer et al., 1981.
Table 10B-8. Adult Consumption of Fish Parts
Species1
Salmon
Lamprey
Trout
Smelt
Whitefish
Sturgeon
Walleye
Squawfish
Sucker
Shad
Source: CRITFC
Number
Consuming
473
249
365
209
125
121
46
15
42
16
, 1994.
Weighted Percent Consuming Specific
Fillet
95.1%
86.4%
89.4%
78.8%
93.8%
94.6%
100%
89.7%
89.3%
93.5%
Skin
55.8%
89.3%
68.5%
88.9%
53.8%
18.2%
20.7%
34.1%
50.0%
15.7%
Head
42.7%
18.1%
13.7%
37.4%
15.4%
6.2%
6.2%
8.1%
19.4%
0.0%
Eggs
42.8%
4.6%
8.7%
46.4%
20.6%
11.9%
9.8%
11.1%
30.4%
0.0%
Parts
Bones
12.1%
5.2%
7.1%
28.4%
6.0%
2.6%
2.4%
5.9%
9.8%
3.3%
Organs
3.7%
3.2%
2.3%
27.9%
0.0%
0.3%
0.9%
0.0%
2.1%
0.0%
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10B-7
-------
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
APPENDIX IOC
PER CAPITA ESTIMATES BY SPECIES
BASED ON THE USDA CSFQ DATA
Exposure Factors Handbook
August1996
Page
10C-1
-------
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 10 - Intake of Fish and Shellfish
tu
a
Oooo
iSiSIIliHl I
'oooooooooo ฐ
Ills
nl!
i!
llllillii
;5S2gs
bbbbSoo
iป.i-4i i
'lillillllfiii iiii
| j 4
f il
i I !
I I I
B 2
1 I
i I
I' I
is' 5
i i
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
10C-3
-------
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
11. INTAKE OF MEAT AND DAIRY PRODUCTS
Consumption of meat, poultry, and dairy products is
a potential pathway of exposure to toxic chemicals. These
food sources can become contaminated if animals are
exposed to contaminated media (i.e., soil, water, or feed
crops).
The .U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA)
Nationwide Food Consumption Survey (NFCS) and
Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII)
are the primary sources of information of intake rates of
meat and dairy products in the United States. Data from the
NFCS have been used in various studies to generate
consumer-only and per capita intake rates for both
individual meat and dairy products and total meat and dairy
products. CSFII 1989-1991 survey data have been
analyzed by EPA to generate per capita intake rates for
various food items and food groups. As described in
Volume n, Chapter 9, consumer-only intake is defined as
the quantity of meat and dairy products consumed by
individuals who ate these food items during the survey
period. Per capita intake rates are generated by averaging
consumer-only intakes over the entire population of users
and non-users. In general, per capita intake rates are
appropriate for use in exposure assessments for which
average dose estimates for the general population are of
interest because they represent both individuals who ate the
foods during the survey period and individuals who may eat
the food items at some time, but did not consume them
during the survey period.
Intake rates may be presented on either an as
consumed or dry weight basis. As consumed intake rates
(g/day) are based on the weight of the food in the form that
it is consumed. In contrast, dry weight intake rates are
based on the weight of the food consumed after the moisture
content has been removed. In calculating exposures based
on ingestion, the unit of weight used to measure intake
should be consistent with those used in measuring the
contaminant concentration in the produce. Fat content data
are also presented for various meat and dairy products.
These data are needed for converting between residue levels
on a whole-weight or as consumed basis and lipid basis.
Intake data from the individual component of the NFCS and
CSFII are based on "as eaten" (i.e., cooked or prepared)
forms of the food items/groups. Thus, corrections to
account for changes in portion sizes from cooking losses are
not required.
The purpose of this section is to provide: (1) intake
data for individual meat and dairy products, total meat, and
total dairy; (2) guidance for converting between as
consumed and dry weight intake rates; and (3) data on the
fat content in meat and dairy products. Recommendations
are based on average and upper-percentile intake among the
general population of the U.S. Available data have been
classified as being either a key or a relevant study based on
the considerations discussed in Volume I, Section 1.3.1 of
the Introduction. Recommendations are based on data from
the CSFTI survey, which was considered the only key intake
study for meats and dairy products. Although Pao et al.
(1982) was not considered a key study for intake of meats
and dairy products because it is based on data from NFCS
1977-1978,. it was included as a key study for serving size.
Other relevant studies are also presented to provide the
reader with added perspective on this topic. It should be
noted that most of the studies presented in this section are
based on data from USDA's NFCS and CSFH. The USDA
NFCS and CSFH are described below.
11.1. INTAKE STUDIES
11.1.1. U.S. Department of Agriculture Nationwide
Food Consumption Survey and Continuing
Survey of Food Intake by Individuals
The NFCS and CSFII are the basis of much of the
data on meat and dairy intake presented in this section.
Data from the 1977-78 NFCS are presented because the
data have been published by USDA in various reports and
reanalyzed by various EPA offices according to the food
items/groups commonly used to assess exposure. Published
one-day data from the 1987-88 NFCS are also presented.
Recently, EPA conducted an analysis of USDA's 1989/91
CSFII. These data are the most recent food survey data that
are available to the public. The results of EPA's analyses
are presented here. Detailed descriptions of the NFCS and
CSFfl data are presented in Volume n, Chapter 9 - Intake
of Fruits and Vegetables.
Individual average daily intake rates calculated from
NFCS data are based on averages of reported individual
intakes over one day or three consecutive days. Such short
term data are suitable for estimating average daily intake
rates representative of both short-term and long-term
consumption. However, the distribution of average daily
intake rates generated using short term data (e.g., 3 day) do
not necessarily reflect the long-term distribution of average
daily intake rates. The distributions generated from short
term and long term data will differ to the extent that each
individual's intake varies from day to day; the distributions
will be similar to the extent that individuals' intakes are
constant from day to day.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
11-1
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
Day-to-day variation in intake among individuals will
be great for food item/groups that are highly seasonal and
for items/groups that are eaten year around but that are not
typically eaten every day. For these foods, the intake
distribution generated from short term data will not be a
good reflection of the long term distribution. On the other
hand, for broad categories of foods (e.g., total vegetables)
which arc eaten on a daily basis throughout the year with
minimal seasonality, the short term distribution may be a
reasonable approximation of the true long term distribution,
although it will show somewhat more variability. In this
and the following section then, distributions are shown only
for the following broad categories of foods: meats and dairy
products. Because of the increased variability of the short-
term distribution, the short-term upper percentiles shown
will overestimate somewhat the corresponding percentiles
of the long-term distribution.
11.1.2. Key Meat and Dairy Products Intake Study
Based on the CSFTI
U.S. EPA Analysis of 1989/91 USDA CSFH Data -
EPA conducted an analysis of USDA's 1989-91 CSFH data
set. The general methodology used in analyzing the data is
presented in Volume n, Chapter 9 (Fruits and Vegetables)
of this Handbook. Intake rates were generated for the
following meat and dairy products: total meats, total dairy,
beef, pork, poultry, game, and eggs. These data have been
corrected to account for mixtures as described in Volume n,
Chapter 9 and Appendix 9A. Per capita intake rates for
total meat and total dairy are presented in Tables 11-1 and
11 -2 at the end of this Chapter. Table 11-3 presents per
capita intake data for individual meats. The results are
presented in units of g/kg-day. Thus, use of these data in
calculating potential dose does not require the body weight
factor to be included in the denominator of the average daily
dose (ADD) equation. It should be noted that converting
these intake rates into units of g/day by multiplying by a
single average body weight is inappropriate, because
individual intake rates were indexed to the actual body
weights of the survey respondents. However, if there is a
need to compare the total intake data presented here to other
intake data in units of g/day, a body weight less than 70 kg
(i.e., approximately 60 kg; calculated based on the number
of respondents in each age category and the average body
weights for these age groups, as presented in Volume I,
Chapter 7) should be used because the total survey
population included children as well as adults.
The advantages of using the CSFH data set are that
the data are expected to be representative of the U.S.
population and that it includes data on a wide variety of food
types. The data set is the most recent of a series of publicly
available data sets (i.e., MFCS 1977/78; NFCS 1987/88;
CSFH 1989-91) from USDA, and should reflect current
eating patterns in the United States. The data set includes
three years of intake data combined. However, the CSFII
data are based on a three day survey period. Short-term
dietary data may not accurately reflect long-term eating
patterns. This is particularly true for the tails of the
distribution of food intake. In addition, the adjustment for
including mixtures adds uncertainty to the intake rate
distributions. The calculation for including mixtures
assumes that intake of any mixture includes all of the foods
identified and the proportions specified in Appendix
Table 9A-1. This assumption yields valid estimates of per
capita consumption, but results in overestimates of the
proportion of the population consuming individual meats;
thus, the quantities reported in Table 11-3 should be
interpreted as upper bounds on the proportion consuming
beef, pork, and poultry, not as valid point estimates.
11.1.3. Key Meat and Dairy Products Serving Size
Study Based on the USDA NFCS
Pao et al. (1982) - Foods Commonly Eaten by
Individuals - Using data gathered in the 1977-78 USDA
NFCS, Pao et al. (1982) calculated percentiles for the
quantities of meat, poultry, and dairy products consumed
per eating occasion by members of the U.S. population.
The data were collected during NFCS home interviews of
37,874 respondents, who were asked to recall food intake
for the day preceding the interview, and record food intake
the day of the interview and the day after the interview.
Quantities consumed per eating occasion, are presented in
Table 11-4.
The advantages of using these data are that they were
derived from the USDA NFCS and are representative of the
U.S. population. This data set provides distributions of
serving sizes for a number of commonly eaten meat,
poultry, and dairy products, but the list of foods is limited
and does not account for meat, poultry, and dairy products
included in complex food dishes. Also, these data are based
on short-term dietary recall and may not accurately reflect
long-term consumption patterns. Although these data are
based on the NFCS 1977-78 survey, serving size data have
been collected but not published for the more recent USDA
surveys.
Page
11-2
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
11.1.4. Relevant Meat and Dairy Products Intake
Studies
The U.S. EPA's Dietary Risk Evaluation System
(ORES) - U.S. EPA, Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) -
EPA OPP's DRES contains per capita intake rate data for
various items of meat, poultry, and dairy products for 22
subgroups (age, regional, and seasonal) of the population.
As described in Volume n, Chapter 9 - Fruits and
Vegetables, intake data in DRES were generated by
determining the composition of NFCS food items and
disaggregating complex food dishes into their component
raw agricultural commodities (RACs) (White et al. 1983).
The DRES per capita, as consumed intake rates for all
age/sex/demographic groups combined are presented in
Table 11-5. These data are based on both consumers and
non-consumers of these food items. Data for specific
subgroups of the population are not presented in this
section, but are available through OPP via direct request.
The data in Table 11-5 may be useful for estimating the
risks of exposure associated with the consumption of the
various meat, poultry, and dairy products presented. It
should be noted that these data are indexed to the actual
body weights of the survey respondents and are expressed
in units of grams of food consumed per kg body weight per
day. Consequently, use of these data in calculating potential
dose does not require the body weight factor in the
denominator of the average daily dose (ADD) equation. It
should also be noted that conversion of these intake rates
into units of g/day by multiplying by a single average body
weight is not appropriate because the DRES data base did
not rely on a single body weight for all individuals. Instead,
DRES used the body weights reported by each individual
surveyed to estimate consumption in units of g/kg-day.
The advantages of using these data are that complex
food dishes have been disaggregated to provide intake rates
for a variety of meat, poultry, and dairy products. These
data are also based on the individual body weights of the
respondents. Therefore, the use of these data in calculating
exposure to toxic chemicals may provide more
representative estimates of potential dose per unit body
weight. However, because the data are based on NFCS
short-term dietary recall, the same limitations discussed
previously for other NFCS data sets also apply here. In
addition, consumption patterns may have changed since the
data were collected in 1977-78. OPP is in the process of
translating consumption information from the USDA CSFII
1989-91 survey to be used in DRES.
Food and Nutrient Intakes of Individuals in One
Day in the U.S., USDA (1980, 1992) -USDA (1980; 1992)
calculated mean per capita intake rates for total meat, total
poultry, and dairy products using NFCS data from 1977-78
and 1987-88. The mean intake rates for meat and dairy
products are presented in Tables 11-6 and 11-7 for meats
and Tables 11-8 and 11-9 for dairy for the two survey years.
These values are based on intake data for one day for
consumers and non-consumers from the 1977-78 and 1987-
88USDANFCSs.
The advantages of using these data are that they
provide mean intake estimates for all meat, poultry, and
dairy products. The consumption estimates are based on
short-term (i.e., 1-day) dietary data which may not reflect
long-term consumption.
U.S. EPA - Office of Radiation Programs - The U.S.
EPA Office of Radiation Programs (ORP) has also used the
USDA 1977-1978 NFCS to estimate daily food intake.
ORP uses food consumption data to assess human intake of
radionuclides in foods (U.S. EPA, 1984a; 1984b). The
1977-1978 NFCS data have been reorganized by ORP, and
food items have been classified according to the
characteristics of radionuclide transport. The mean per
capita dietary intake of food sub classes (milk, other dairy
products, eggs, beef, pork, poultry, and other meat) grouped
by age for the U.S. population is presented in Table 11-10.
The mean daily intake rates of meat, poultry, and dairy
products for the U.S. population grouped by regions are
presented in Table 11-11. Because this study was based on
the USDA NFCS, the limitations and advantages associated
with the USDA NFCS data also apply to these data.
U.S. EPA - Office of Science and Technology - The
U.S EPA Office of Science and Technology (OST) within
the Office of Water (formerly the Office of Water
Regulations and Standards) used data from the FDA
revision of the Total Diet Study Food Lists and Diets
(Pennington, 1983) to calculate food intake rates. OST uses
these consumption data in its risk assessment model for land
application of municipal sludge. The FDA data used are
based on the combined results of the USDA 1977-1978
NFCS and the second National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey (NHANES H), 1976-1980
(U.S. EPA, 1989). Because food items are listed as
prepared complex foods in the FDA Total Diet Study, each
item was broken down into its component parts so that the
amount of raw commodities consumed could be determined.
Table 11-12 presents intake rates for meat, poultry, and
dairy products for various age groups. Estimated lifetime
ingestion rates derived by U.S. EPA (1989) are also
presented in Table 11-12. Note that these are per capita
intake rates tabulated as grams dry weight/day. Therefore,
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
11-3
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
these rates differ from those in the previous tables because
Pao ct a!. (1982) and U.S. EPA (1984a, 1984b) report
intake rates on an as consumed basis.
The EPA-OST analysis provides intake rates for
additional food categories and estimates of lifetime average
daily intake on a per capita basis. In contrast to the other
analyses of USDA MFCS data, this study reports the data in
terms of dry weight intake rates. Thus, conversion is not
required when contaminants are provided on a dry weight
basis.
USDA (1993) - Food Consumption, Prices, and
Expenditures, 1970-92 - The USDA's Economic Research
Service (ERS) calculates the amount of food available for
human consumption in the United States annually. Supply
and utilization balance sheets were generated. These were
based on the flow of food items from production to end
uses. Total available supply was estimated as the sum of
production (i.e., some products were measured at the farm
level or during processing), starting inventories, and
imports (USDA, 1993). The availability of food for human
use commonly termed as "food disappearance" was
determined by subtracting exported foods, products used in
industries, farm inputs (seed and feed) and end-of-the year
inventories from the total available supply (USDA, 1993).
USDA (1993) calculated the per capita food consumption
by dividing the total food disappearance by the total U.S.
population.
USDA (1993) estimated per capita consumption
data for meat, poultry, and dairy products from 1970-1992
(1992 data are preliminary). In this section, the 1991
values, which are the most recent final data, are presented.
The meat consumption data were reported as carcass
weight, retail weight equivalent, and boneless weight
equivalent. The poultry consumption data were reported as
ready-to-cook (RTC) weight, retail weight, and boneless
weight (USDA, 1993). USDA (1993) defined beef carcass
weight as the chilled hanging carcass, which includes the
kidney and attached internal fat (kidney, pelvic, and heart
fat), excludes the skin, head, feet, and unattached internal
organs. The pork carcass weight includes the skin and feet,
but excludes the kidney and attached internal fat. Retail
weight equivalents assume all food was sold through retail
foodstores; therefore, conversion factors (Table 11-13)
were used to correct carcass or RTC to retail weight to
account for trimming, shrinkage, or loss of meat and
chicken at these retail outlets (USDA, 1993). Boneless
equivalent values for meat (pork, veal, beef) and poultry
excludes all bones, but includes separable fat sold on retail
cuts of red meat. Pet food was considered as an apparent
source of food disappearance for poultry in boneless weight
estimates, while pet food was excluded for beef, veal, and
pork (USDA, 1993). Table 11-13 presents per capita
consumption in 1991 for red meat (carcass weight, retail
equivalent, and boneless trimmed equivalent) and poultry
(RTC, retail equivalent for chicken only, and boneless
trimmed equivalent). Per capita consumption estimates
based on boneless weights appear to be the most
appropriate data for use in exposure assessments, because
boneless meats are more representative of what people
would actually consume. Table 11-14 presents per capita
consumption in 1991 for dairy products including eggs,
milk, cheese, cream, and sour cream.
One of the limitations of this study is that
disappearance data do not account for losses from the food
supply from waste, spoilage, or foods fed to pets. Thus,
intake rates based on these data will overestimate daily
consumption because they are based on the total quantity of
marketable commodity utilized. Therefore, these data may
be useful for estimating bounding exposure estimates. It
should also be noted that per capita estimates based on food
disappearance are not a direct measure of actual
consumption or quantity ingested, instead the data are used
as indicators of changes in usage over time (USDA, 1993).
An advantage of this study is that it provides per capita
consumption rates for meat, poultry, and dairy products
which are representative of long-term intake because
disappearance data are generated annually. Daily per capita
intake rates are generated by dividing annual consumption
by 365 days/year.
National Live Stock and Meat Board (1993) -
Eating in America Today: A Dietary Pattern and Intake
Report- The National Live Stock and Meat Board (1993)
assessed the nutritional value of the current American diet
based on two factors: (1) the composition of the foods
consumed, and (2) the amount of food consumed. Data
used in this study were provided by MRCA Information
Services, Inc. through MRCA's Nutritional Marketing
Information Division. The survey conducted by MRCA
consisted of a 2,000 household panels of over 4,700
individuals. The survey sample was selected to be
representative of the U.S. population. Information obtained
from the survey by MRCA's Menu Census included food
and beverage consumption over a period of 14 consecutive
days. The head of the household recorded daily food and
beverage consumption in-home and away-from-home in
diaries for each household member. The survey period was
from July 1,1990 through June 30, 1991. This ensured that
all days carried equal weights and provided a seasonally
Page
11-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
balanced data set. In addition, nutrient intake data
calculated by the MRCA's Nutrient Intake Database (NID)
(based on the 1987-88 USDA Food Intake Study) and
information on food attitudes were also collected. It should
be noted, however, that the 14 daily diaries provide only the
incidence of eating each food product by an individual, but
not the quantity eaten by each person. The intake rate for
each individual is estimated by multiplying the eating
frequency of a particular food item by the average amount
eaten per eating occasion. The data on the average amount
eaten per eating occasion was obtained from the USDA
NFCS survey.
Table 11-15 presents the adult daily mean intake of
meat and poultry grouped by region and gender. The adult
population was defined as consumers ages 19 and above
(National Live Stock and Meat Board, 1993). Beef
consumption was high in all regions compared to other
meats and poultry (Table 11-15). The average daily
consumption of meat in the U.S. was 114.2 g/day which
included beef (57 percent), veal (0.5 percent), lamb (0.5
percent), game/variety meats (8 percent), processed meats
(18 percent), and pork (16 percent) (National Live Stock
and Meat Board, 1993). Table 11-16 shows the amount of
meat consumed by the adult population grouped as non-
meat eaters (1 percent), light meat eaters (30 percent),
medium meat eaters (33 percent), and heavy meat eaters
(36 percent).
The advantage of this study is that the survey period
is longer (i.e., 14 days) than any other food consumption
survey. The survey is also based on a nationally
representative sample. The survey also accounts for foods
eaten as mixtures. However, only mean values are
provided. Therefore, distribution of long-term consumption
patterns cannot be derived. In addition, the survey collects
data on incidence of eating each food item and not actual
consumption rates. This may introduce some bias in the
results. The direction of this bias is unknown.
AIHC(1994) - Exposure Factors Sourcebook - The
AIHC Sourcebook (AfflC, 1994) uses the data presented in
the 1989 version of the Exposure Factors Handbook which
reported data from the USDA 1977-78 NFCS. In this
Handbook, new analyses of more recent data from the
USDA 1989/91 CSFn are presented. Numbers, however,
cannot be directly compared with previous values since the
results from the new analysis are presented on a body
weight basis.
The Sourcebook was selected as a relevant study
because it was not the primary source for the data used to
make recommendations in this document. However, it is an
alternative information source. The advantage of using the
CSFII and USDA NFCS data set instead, is they are the
largest publicly available data source on food intake
patterns in the United States. Data are available for a wide
variety of meat, poultry, and dairy products and are intended
to be representative of the U.S. population.
11.2. FAT CONTENT OF MEAT AND DAIRY
PRODUCTS
In some cases, the residue levels of contaminants in
meat and dairy products are reported as the concentration of
contaminant per gram of fat. When using these residue
levels, the assessor should ensure consistency in the
exposure assessment calculations by using consumption
rates that are based on the amount of fat consumed for the
meat or dairy product of interest. Alternately, residue levels
for the "as consumed" portions of these products may be
estimated by multiplying the levels based on fat by the
fraction of fat per product as follows:
residue level
g- product
residue level
g-fat
8 -fat
g- product
(Eqn. 11-1)
The resulting residue levels may then be used in conjunction
with "as consumed" consumption rates. The percentages of
lipid fat in meat and dairy products have been reported in
various publications. USDA's Agricultural Handbook
Number 8 (USDA, 1979-1984) provides composition data
for agricultural products. It includes a listing of the total
saturated, monounsaturated, and polyunsaturated fats for
various meat and dairy items. Table 11-17 presents the
total fat content for selected meat and dairy products taken
from Handbook Number 8. The total percent fat content is
based on the sum of saturated, monounsaturated, and
polyunsaturated fats.
The National Livestock and Meat Board (NLMB)
(1993) used data from Agricultural Handbook Number 8
and consumption data to estimate the fat contribution to the
U.S. diet. Total fat content in grams, based on a 3-ounce
(85.05 g) cooked serving size, was reported for several
categories (retail composites) of meats. These data are
presented in Table 11-18 along with the corresponding
percent fat content values for each product. NLMB (1993)
also reported that 0.17 grams of fat are consumed per gram
of meat (i.e., beef, pork, lamb, veal, game, processed meats,
and variety meats) (17 percent) and 0.08 grams of fat are
consumed per gram of poultry (8 percent).
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
11-5
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
The average total fat content of the U.S. diet was
reported to be 68.3 g/day. The meat group (meat, poultry,
fish, dry beans, eggs, and nuts) was reported to contribute
the most to the average total fat in the diet (41 percent)
(NLMB, 1993). Meats (i.e., beef, pork, lamb, veal, game,
processed meats, and variety meats) reportedly contribute
less than 30 percent to the total fat of the average U.S. diet.
The milk group contributes approximately 12 percent to the
average total fat in the U.S. diet (NLMB, 1993). Fat intake
rates and the contributions of the major food groups to fat
intake for heavy, medium, and light meat eaters, and non
meat eaters are presented in Table 11-19 (NLMB, 1993).
NLMB (1993) also reported the average meat fat intake to
be 19.4 g/day, with beef contributing about 50 percent of
the fat to the diet from all meats. Processed meats
contributed 31 percent; pork contributed 14 percent; game
and variety meats contributed 4 percent; and lamb and veal
contributed 1 percent to the average meat fat intake.
The Center for Disease Control (CDC) (1994) used
data from NHANES m to calculate daily total food energy
intake (TFEI), total dietary fat intake, and saturated fat
intake for the U.S. population during 1988 to 1991. The
sample population comprised 20,277 individuals ages 2
months and above, of which 14,001 respondents (73
percent response rate) provided dietary information based
on a 24-hour recall. TFEI was defined as "all nutrients (i.e.,
protein, fat, carbohydrate, and alcohol) derived from
consumption of foods and beverages (excluding plain
drinking water) measured in kilocalories (kcal)." Total
dietary fat intake was defined as "all fat (i.e., saturated and
unsaturatcd) derived from consumption of foods and
beverages measured in grams."
CDC (1994) estimated and provided data on the
mean daily TFEI and the mean percentages of TFEI from
total dietary fat grouped by age and gender. The overall
mean daily TFEI was 2,095 kcal for the total population and
34 percent (or 82 g) of their TFEI was from total dietary fat
(CDC, 1994). Based on this information, the mean daily fat
intake was calculated for the various age groups and
genders (see Appendix 11A for detailed calculation). Table
11 -20 presents the grams of fat per day obtained from the
daily consumption of foods and beverages grouped by age
and gender for the U.S. population.
11.3. CONVERSION BETWEEN AS CONSUMED
AND DRY WEIGHT INTAKE RATES
As noted previously, intake rates may be reported in
terms of units as consumed or units of dry weight. It is
essential that exposure assessors be aware of this difference
so that they may ensure consistency between the units used
for intake rates and those used for concentration data (i.e.,
if the unit of food consumption is grams dry weight/day,
then the unit for the amount of pollutant in the food should
be grams dry weight). If necessary, as consumed intake
rates may be converted to dry weight intake rates using the
moisture content percentages of meat, poultry and dairy
products presented in Table 11-21 and the following
equation:
(Eqn. 11-2)
Dry weight" intake rates may be converted to "as consumed"
rates by using:
where:
ซ,
ซ.
W
dw
(Eqn. 11-3)
dry weight intake rate;
as consumed intake rate; and
= percent water content.
11.4. RECOMMENDATIONS
The CSFn data described in this section was used in
selecting recommended meat, poultry, and dairy product
intake rates for the general population and various
subgroups of the United States population. The general
design of both key and relevant studies are summarized in
Table 11-22. The recommended values for intake of meat
and dairy products are summarized in Table 11-23 and the
confidence ratings for the recommended values for meat and
dairy intake rates are presented in Table 11-24. Per capita
intake rates for specific meat items, on a g/kg-day basis,
may be obtained from Table 11-3. Percentiles of the intake
rate distribution in the general population for total meat and
total dairy, as well as per capita rates, are presented in
Tables 11-1 and 11-2. From these tables, the mean and
95th percentile intake rates for meats are 2.1 g/kg-day and
5.1 g/kg-day, respectively. The mean and 95th percentile
intake rates for dairy products are 8.0 g/kg-day and 29.7
g/kg-day. It is important to note that the distributions
presented in Tables 11-1 through 11-3 are based on data
collected over a 3-day period and may not necessarily
reflect the long-term distribution of average daily intake
rates. However, for these broad categories of food (i.e.,
Page
11-6
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dciry Products
total meats and total dairy products), because they may be
eaten on a daily basis throughout the year with minimal
seasonaliry, the short-term distribution may be a reasonable
approximation of the long-term distribution, although it will
display somewhat increased variability. This implies that
the upper percentiles shown here will tend to overestimate
the corresponding percentiles of the true long-term
distribution. Intake rates for the homeproduced form of
these food items/groups are presented in Volume II Chapter
12.
This section also presents. recommendations for
serving size for various meats and dairy products. These
recommendations are based on the USD A NFCS 1977-78
data. The confidence rating for serving size recommend-
ations are presented in Table 11-25. Percentiles of the
serving size, as well as mean values, can be obtained from
Table 11-4.
11.5. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 11
American Industrial Health Council (AIHC). (1994)
Exposure factors sourcebook, Washington, DC.,
. . AIHC,.
CDC. (1994) Dietary fat and total food-energy intake.
Third National Health and Nutrition Examination
Survey, Phase 1,1988-91. Morbidity and Mortality
Weekly Report, February 25,1994: 43(7)118-125.
Finley, B.L.; Paustenbach, B.L. (1992) Opportunities for
improving exposure assessments using population
distribution estimates. Presented for the Committee
on Risk Assessment Methodology, February 10-11,
Washington, DC.
National Livestock and Meat Board. (1993) Eating in
America today: A dietary pattern and intake report.
National Livestock and Meat Board. Chicago, IL.
Pao, E.M.; Fleming, K.H.; Guenther, P.M.; Mickle, S.J.
(1982) Foods commonly eaten by individuals:
amount per day and per eating occasion. U.S.
Department of Agriculture. Home Economics
Report No. 44.
Pennington, J.A.T. (1983) Revision of the total diet
study food list and diets. J. Am. Diet. Assoc.
82:166-173.
USDA. (1979-1984) Agricultural Handbook No. 8.
United States Department of Agriculture.
USDA. (1980) Food and nutrient intakes of individuals
in one day in the United States, Spring 1977. U.S.
Department of Agriculture. Nationwide Food
Consumption Survey 1977-1978. Preliminary
Report No. 2.
USDA. (1992) Food and nutrient intakes by individuals
in the United States, 1 day, 1987-88. U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Human Nutrition
Information Service. Nationwide Food Consumption
Survey 1987-88, NFCS Rpt. No. 87-1-1.
USDA. (1993) Food consumption prices and
expenditures (1970-1992) U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Statistical
Bulletin, No. 867.
U.S. EPA. (1984a) An estimation of the daily average
food intake by age and sex for use in assessing the
radionuclide intake of individuals in the general
population. EPA-520/1-84-021.
U,S.EPA. (1984b) An estimation of the daily food
intake based on data from the 1977-1978 USDA
Nationwide Food Consumption Survey.
Washington, DC: Office of Radiation Programs.
EPA-520/1-84-015.
U.S. EPA. (1989) Development of risk assessment
methodologies for land application and distribution
and marketing of municipal sludge. Washington,
DC: Office of Science and Technology. EPA 600/-
89/001.
White, S.B.; Peterson, B.; Clayton, C.A.; Duncan, D.P.
(1983) Interim Report Number 1: The construction
of a raw agricultural commodity consumption data
base. Prepared by Research Triangle Institute for
EPA Office of Pesticide Programs.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
11-7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
1
I
1
^
1
I
(
<
ฃ
g
V
g
V
ฃ
S
o.
ฃ'
o
ฃ
E
U3
0?
e:
a 1
o
a =
s. i
S 0
S S38SfSR3S S S 2 3 S 3 8 2 S R 3 2 3895
a 3 F; s =: ป oo ^ ซ a'222 a'is eojqodrs FJ22'a
5 RSSRSSRS S S S a SS^ SESP!S2 SRR3
ง 9299nSป 3533 S3? 33339 ง!3ง
S SSSasSSK =S2S 2SS 933 S-B SSSS
<ป ซt^> ซ4ซ-;oc>oo oooca c5cic> cSocioo OOCDO
d -'-io'oooo' o o o e3 cJ o o c> o 0*0*0*0
o oooooooo oooo ooo ooooo oooo
d dcioo'ooocJ ddeJo* o" o" o o'odoo* o'cidd
ci ri'vcncoci-i Iซ-H MCSCICM CN'HH ci
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
s
1
$
V
1
5
ฃ
i
=
ฃ
s
o
|
i
S
i
cu
i
ฃ
1
;.
n
ฃ
a.
V
:
o
CL
ฃ
E
w
c
. i
s I
g i
flj ""
U
ง
1 ง
ฃ u
TV in .ON oo in ^f f. '^ rn ^ >n o* ปn ON in ^ 04 o" *n ^ tr! in *n oป NC
g s 1 s s s s s s 58 SB g|5 SgSlI liS5
S 1 !sf Pi;s |งll iงI il ง5 1 liil
01 , .
r^ oo o r- ป 3 o M3 f^ooort Inr-o t~- : <*" r^ fO.Qr":oc
y. ซqo.pS5R!aซ8!a -gsS SS^ SSSSS PBSS
22 2 9SS2ซ'ฐง glli SSS ^ฃSSป S I 2 *
cd ซ NO* oo* oo ON* uS ^ Tt* odr-"r^od oo'r-^od r^r^od 'cd c^r-^r-'oc
m ซn jq o* ปn CN (N m *i ซn en fi m m en m ซ n ^ m. *" m r-. f.
NO oo f1) o\ CM in ** NO eMr^-r^o^ ^PJS^ rn ^* *n o NO cvi o
" Tf in NO c>" o o* ป^ซJM _; _; _^ o o o' - _^ " _;
O ON >O ^ O \O r ooosr-m oo m ^- * m ON OMP-O
o' o odvdrno'ooo* o'o'o'o' o'o'o' o'o'o'do" 00*00
2 ฐ SRss^sss ฃฃ2:ฃ D2E: Osg^a R22-C:
o oim' o'o'o'd o'o'o'o' o* o o oocao oo'oo
o o ooooooo oooo ooo ooooo oooo
o' H o'o'o'oooo*' o'o'do", o'dci o " "d o'o'o'c
s 1 l^Ss^lg sงls SSI Sss-ง5 llss
* ^ ER * IS * * ซ'* *ซ^* tSESig ^^S^ = = ^ป = =
^ซ \o *o vi^ON^cK^o r^-oooo^- c*i\o^f o oo ov . r~~ f.r-if. (^
S S SSiS&ScSSi S8J8J.S SJ^S SSJooSSi RSSS
1 i
. - .. 1 f f S < $ * %
g Iv I I i d i 1 I a 1 H (g 1 l^ll 1 'I Ills s 1 1 1 1
a
2
j|
11
fe -=1
! ** S
S "S ^
1 g I
|||
11 N g
1
w 1
2 ฃ
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
11-9
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
UJ
C/J
งi
2
D
i"l
ctj ci
6
S"*"1 fii
UJ
"9 M
1
i ฃ> J
ฃ *zz
.ฃ o
1 if
a <5 I
5 o
1 ซ
S M
S
1 i
* ,, Q
| ฃ "*
5 eo
1 I'L
gj |3
^5 <ฃ ง
1 ฐ
* [11
ซ? ซ
s.
a
_ i
ซi ^
is 2:
ta
*- ,c
8 la
ฃI
g
J2 9-
ฃ(5
o
0
o
o
o
0
CM.
""
s
8
o
oo
0
o!
g
s
8
o
VO
CM
o
ts
i
r.
^
o
!Q
oo
o
T
^
3
o
nCS2Sฃ^n:2 S^^r; -*oooo r-nvo tsvov, CM
S2So. c>Soo S55S 555 og5ง5 5SSS
oooooooo oooo' ooo* o'o'o'o o'o'o'c
n-voo^-^orMrM
~~ ^1 O O ^ O "^ O O *~" tO > O O O O * * ป O O *-
oooooooo oooo ooo OQOOO oooo
oooooooo o'o'o'o 00*0 oooo oooo
to ON v^ o c^v m ป^ (*ซ r*" r~- vo t*- o "' o *-* vo P*I Tt* tN in oo f**i
pppppppp oooo ooo ooooo oooo
ooooo" o'o'o' 00*00* ,0*0*0 o'o'ooo* o'o'o'o'
oo o oo m vj ^fr <ซ$ ^oin^otn vow^^o t~-p-mooin msosov
o ooooo" o'o'o'o o'oo* o'oo'o'o* o'o'o'o*
gggg^lgg fISf SSS gfggg gggg
oooooooo oooo ooo ooooo oooo
oooooooo oo'oo" o'oo' ooooo o'o'o'o
-cMprjoocMg ass's gฃ3 ^^งง5:5 S^S3S
Ol ^f *^f fl C^ a\OAOปoooo OAOOOOON OOONON ooooooooo\ ONO>OOOO
jnjoooo^cs oo Tj-Tj-r-ปn mm o* oo'oo
^ ON^*^"O\ ง Iroofe feo'om feSa^Sfe SSS^
rn ro ^ฑ in *n c*i o t"* (N o o r*i o o c*i oo vo *" o >ป "ง 'n
C w>e!r"5'e3^pO M? ^"SS
t^iiiiiiiiil^i ii 1 1 Iliiii liiii
Page
11-10
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter II - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
8 c
il
0 \
s.g
s .ซ
0
tu
oo
*' ซ; >s fri v> hrf* *t -*r v-i ซ.__--ป-, -..ป-. ^i ^.- >_^ s* >t^ __ - . - -
8 ?|?!92SS88 88S8 888 S S S S S 8S8B
o ooo'o'ooo'o oooo o'o'o ooooo 00*00
ซ-" cn^j-Tj-
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
1
1
I
g >,
|Q
<3^
a"
ji
" S
Q g
lj
P
o .>
ll
~l
1 1
i*
SJ5
O "*
sl
1
"T
n
JU
H
c
j
I
&
1
I
i'l
c3 S
o .a
u s
t_
"8
I
1
ฃ
I
Cv
&
a
s
>ซ
o
a
o
S -E8
S -3
u S S
^* C/3 ^
IP
.ฃ> ซ"
"
ง "i
51
1
s
s
ซ ซ
S52^2trioooov^ t*j ปn v% v! *
SงS|งSงg g?5S|s
SSg^'SSP SSSSS
i n
SSgSSgSfSgi 8 * * ซ ป
S^-J3rslซ*s'?s*'^ *S^r**!3!O(
oo-coSSSK K^-^gs
ป -ซ-M--*SJf? ^""^S
ooo3SSPf-^i2fO 52Sm?5
SSS|งgS8 SS^g?
vomo%(omoor.oo
^r*-oCf S S>JJซi 0
siiliss^aaJiSs
I
1
1
1
i
"Q V
S i"
|s|
*o 2 ^
w i I
J.M p. rj
its ' '
H jrf r
I"l ^ 1
i *y
- ^ 8 ;:
^aSe Exposure Factors Handbook
J1~12 August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
Table 1 1-5. Mean Per Capita Intake Rates for Meat, Poultry, and Dairy Products (g/Kg-d as consumed)
Based on All
Raw Agricultural Commodity'
Milk-Non-Fat Solids
Milk-Non-Fat Solids (Food additive)
Milk-Fat Solids
Milk-Fat Solids (Food additive)
Milk Sugar (Lactose)
Beef-Meat Byproducts
Beef (Organ Meats) - Other
Beef -Dried
Beef (Boneless) - Fat (Beef Tallow)
Beef (Organ Meats) - Kidney
Beef (Organ Meats) - Liver
Beef (Boneless) - Lean (w/o Removeable Fat)
Goat-Meat Byproducts
Goat (Organ Meats) - Other
Goat (Boneless) - Fat
Goat (Organ Meats) - Kidney
Goat (Organ Meats) - Liver
Goat (Boneless) - Lean (w/o Removeable Fat)
Horse
Rabbit
Sheep - Meat Byproducts
Sheep (Organ Meats) - Other
Sheep (Boneless) - Fat
Sheep (Organ Meats) - Kidney
Sheep (Organ Meats) - Liver
Sheep (Boneless) - Lean (w/o Removeable F;at)
Pork - Meat Byproducts
Pork (Organ Meats) - Other
Pork (Boneless) - Fat (Including Lard)
Pork (Organ Meats) - Kidney
Pork (Organ Meats) - Liver
Pork (Boneless) - Lean (w/o Removeable Fat)
Meat, Game
Turkey - Byproducts
Turkey - Giblets (Liver)
Turkey - Flesh (w/o Skin, w/o Bones)
Turkey - Flesh (+ Skin, w/o Bones)
Turkey - Unspecified
Poultry, Other - Byproducts
Poultry, Other - Giblets (Liver)
Poultry, Other - Flesh (+ Skin, w/o Bones)
Eggs - Whole
Eggs - White Only
Eggs - Yolk Only
Chicken - Byproducts
Chicken - Giblets (Liver)
Chicken - Flesh (w/o Skin, w/o Bones)
Chicken - Flesh (+ Skin, w/o Bones')
NA = Not applicable
* Consumed in any raw or prepared form.
Source: ORES database
Sex/ Age/Demographic Subgroups
Average Consumption (Grams/kg
Body Weight/Day)
0.9033354
0.9033354
0.4297199
0.4297199
0.0374270
, 0.0176621
0.0060345
0.0025325
0.3720755
0.0004798
0.0206980
1.1619987
0.0000000
0.0000000
0.0000397
0.0000000
0.0000000
0.0001891
0.0000000
0.0014207
0.0000501
0.0000109
0.0042966
0.0000090
0.0000000
0.0124842
0.0250792
0.0038496
0.2082022
0.0000168
0.0048194
0.3912467
0.0063507
0.0002358
0.0000537
0.0078728
0.0481655
0.0000954
0.0000000
0.0002321
0.0053882
0.5645020
0.0092044
0.0066323
0.0000000
0.0050626
0.0601361
0.3793205
Standard Error
0.0134468
0.0134468
0.0060264
0.0060264
0.0033996
0.0005652
0.0007012
0.0004123
0.0048605
0.0003059
0.0014002
0.0159453
NA .
NA
0.0000238
NA
NA
0.0001139
NA
0.00003544
0.0000381
0.0000197
0.0005956
0.0000079
NA
0.0015077
0.0022720
0.0003233
0.0032032
0.0000106
0.0004288
0.0060683
0.0010935
0.0000339
0.0000370
0.0007933
0.0026028
0.0000552
NA
0.0001440
0.0007590
0.0076651
0.0004441
0.0004295
NA
0.0005727
0.0021616
0.0104779
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
11-13
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
Table 11-6. Mean Meat Intakes per Individual in a Day by Sex and Age (g/day as consumed)' for 1977-1978
Tolal Lamb, Frankfurters,
Mcat. Poultry Veal, Sausages, Luncheon
Group ARC (yrs.) and Fish Beef Pork Game Meats. Spreads
Males and Females
I and Under 72 9 4 3 >
1-2 91 18 '6 (b) 15
3-5 121 23 8 (b) 15
6-8 149 33 15 ! 1?
Males
9-11 188 41 22 3 19
12-14 218 53 18 (b) 25
15-18 272 82 24 1 25
19-22 310 90 21 2 33
23-34 285 86 27 '1 30
35-50 295 75 28 1 26
51-64 274 70 32 1 29
65-74 231 54 25 2 22
75 and Over 196 41 39 7 19
Females
9-11 162 38 17 1 20
12-14 176 47 19 1 18
15- IK |80 .46 14 > 16
1922 184 52 19 1 18
23-34 183 48 17 1 16
35-50 187 49 19 2 14
51-64 187 52 19 2 12
65-74 159 34 21 4 12
75 and Over 134 31 17 2 9
Males and Females
AllAees 207 54 20 2 20
' Based on USDA Nationwide Food Consumption Survey (1977-1978) data for one day
* Less than 0.5 g but more than 0.
1 Includes mixtures containing meat, poultry, or fish as a main ingredient
Source: USDA. 1980.
Total
4
16
19
20
24
27
37
45
31
31
31
29
28
27
23
28
26
24
24
26
30
19
27
Chicken
Only
1
13
19
19
21
24
32
43
29
28
29
26
25
23
22
27
24
22
21
24
25
16
24
Meat
Mixtures'
51
32
49
55
71
87
93
112
94
113
86
T)
fฃ
54
55
61
61
61
66
63
60
, ' A~l
T /
49
Table 11-7. Mean Meat Intakes per Individual in a Day by Sex and Age (g/day as consumed)1 for
Total Meat, Lamb, Frankfurters,
Group Poultry, and Veal, Sausages,
Age (yrs.) Fish Beef Pork Game Luncheon Meats
Males and Females
5 and Under 92 10 9 <0.5 11
Males
6-11 156 22 14 <0.5 13
12-19 252 38 17 1 20
20 and over 250 44 19 23 2
Females
6-11 151 26 9 1 11
12-19 169 31 10 <0.5 18
20 and over 170 29 12 1 13
All individuals 193 32 14 1 n
Total
Poultry
14
27
27
31
20
17
24
26
1987-1988
Chicken
Only
12
24
20
25
17
13
18
20
.Meat
Mixturess'
39
74
142
108
74
80
73
86
* Based on USDA Nationwide Food Consumption Survey (1987 to 1988) data for one day.
k Includes mixtures containing meat, poultry, or fish as a main ingredient
Source: USDA, 1992.
Page
11-14
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
Table 1 1-8. Mean Dairy Product Intakes per Individual in a Day, by Sex and Age (g/day as consumed)1 for 1977-1978
Group Age (yrs.)
1 and Under
1-2
3-5
6-8
9-11
12-14
15-18
19-22
23-34
35-50
51-64
65-74 '
75 and Over
9-11 '
12-14
15-18
19-22 .
23-34
35-50
51-64
65-74 '
75 and Over
All Aees
Total Milk
618
404
353
433
432
504
519
388
243
203
180
217
193
402
387
316
224
182
130
139
166
214
266
Ruid Milk
361
397
330
401
402
461
467
353
213
192
173
204
184
371
343
279
205
158
117
128
156
205
242
Cheese
1
8
9
10
8
9
13
15
21
18
17
14
18
7
11
11
18
19
18
19
. 14
20
15
Eggs
5
20
22
18
26
28
31
32
38
41
36
36
41
14
19
21
26
26
23
24
22
19
27
Based, on USDA Nationwide Food Consumption Survey (1977-1978) data for one day.
Source: USDA, 1980.
Table 11-9. Mean Dairy Product Intakes per Individual
Group Age (yrs.)
Males and Females
5 and under
Males
6-11
12-19
20 and over
Females
6-11
12-19
20 and over
All inividuals
' Based on USDA Nationwide
Source: USDA, 1992.
in a Day, by Sex and Age (g/day as consumed)' for 1987-1988
Total Fluid Milk Whole Milk
347
439
392
202
310
260
148
224
Food Consumption Survey (1987 to
177
224
183
88
135
124
55
99
1988) data
Lowfat/Skim Milk
129
159
168
94
135
114
81
102
for one day.
Cheese
7
10
12
17
9
12
15
14
Eggs
11
17
17
27
14
18
17
20
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
11-15
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
Table 1 l-10.Mean and Standard Error for the Dietary Intake
of Food Sub Classes per Capita by Age (g/day as consumed)
Age (yrs.)
All Ages
<1
1-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-39
40-59
*60
Source: U.S.
Fresh Cows'
Milk
253.5 ฑ 4.9
272.0 ฑ 31.9
337.3 ฑ 15.6
446.2 ฑ 13.1
456.0 ฑ 12.3
404.8 ฑ 12.9
264.3 ฑ 16.4
217.6 ฑ 17.2
182.9 ฑ 13.5
169.1 ฑ 10.5
192.4 ฑ 11.8
EPA. 1984a.
Other Dairy
Products
55.1 ฑ 1.2
296.7 ฑ 7.6
41.0 ฑ3.7
47.3 ฑ 3.1
53.3 ฑ 2.9
52.9 ฑ3.1
44.2 ฑ 4.0
51.5 ฑ4.1
53.8 ฑ 3.2
52.0 ฑ 2.5
55.9 ฑ 2.8
Eggs
26.9 ฑ 0.5
4.9 ฑ 3.2
19.8 ฑ 1.6
17.0 ฑ 1.3
19.3 ฑ 1.2
24.8 ฑ .3
28.3 ฑ .7
27.9 ฑ .7
30.1 ฑ .4
31.1 ฑ .0
28.7 ฑ .2
Beef
87.6 ฑ 1.1
18.4 ฑ 7.4
42.2 ฑ 3.7
63.4 ฑ3.1
81.9 ฑ 2.9
99.5 ฑ 3.0
103.7 ฑ 3.9
103.8 ฑ 4.0
105.8 ฑ 3.2
99.0 ฑ 2.5
74.3 ฑ 2.8
Pork
28.2 ฑ 0.6
5.8 ฑ 3.6
13.6 ฑ 1.8
18.2 ฑ 1.5
22.2 ฑ 1.4
29.5 ฑ 1.5
29.6 ฑ 1.9
31.8 ฑ 2.0
33.0 ฑ 1.5
33.5 ฑ 1.2
27.5 ฑ 1.3
Poultry
31.3 ฑ 0.8
18.4 ฑ 4.9
19.0 ฑ 2.4
24.7 ฑ 2.0
30.0 ฑ 1.9
33.0 ฑ 2.0
33.0 ฑ 2.6
33.8 ฑ 2.7
34.0 ฑ 2.1
33.8 ฑ 1.6
31.5 ฑ 1.8
Other Meat
25.1 ฑ0.4
2.6 ฑ 2.8
17.6 ฑ 1.4
22.3 ฑ 1.2
26.1 ฑ .1
27.6 ฑ .1
28.8 ฑ .5
28.9 ฑ .5
28.4 ฑ .2
27.4 ฑ 0.9
21.1 ฑ 1.0
Table 11-11. Mean and Standard Error for the Daily Intake of Food Class and Sub Class by Region (g/day as consumed)
US Population
Northeast
North Central
South
West
Dairy Products (Total)
Fresh Cows Milk
Other
Eggs
Meats (Total)
Beef and Veal
Pork
Poultry
Other
308.6 ฑ 5.3
253.5 ฑ 4.9
55.1 ฑ 1.2
26.9 ฑ 0.5
172.2 ฑ 1.6
87.6 ฑ 1.1
28.2 ฑ 0.6
31.3 ฑ 0.8
25.1 ฑ 0.4
318.6 ฑ 10.4
256.1 ฑ 9.7
62.5 ฑ 2.3
23.8 ฑ 1.0
169.9 ฑ 3.3
82.3 ฑ 2.3
28.8 ฑ 1.1
31.7 ฑ 1.5
27.1 ฑ 0.9
336.1 ฑ 10.0
279.7 ฑ 9.4
56.5 ฑ 2.2
23.5 ฑ 0.9
176.9 ฑ3.1
92.9 ฑ 2.2
29.6 ฑ 1.1
26.6 ฑ 1.4
27.8 ฑ 0.8
253.6 ฑ 8.4
211.0 ฑ 7.8
42.6 ฑ 1.9
31.0 ฑ 0.8
171.9 ฑ 2.6
84.0 ฑ 1.8
30.1 ฑ0.9
36.5 ฑ 1.2
21.3 ฑ 0.7
348.1 ฑ 12.3
283.5 ฑ11.5
64.6 ฑ 2.7
29.1 ฑ 1.2
168.6 ฑ 3.9
92.9 ฑ 2.7
22.1 ฑ 1.3
28.9 ฑ 1.8
24.7 ฑ 1.0
NOTE: Northeast = Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, and
Pennsylvania.
North Central = Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska,
and Kansas.
Soulh = Maryland, Delaware, District of Columbia, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida,
Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas, and Oklahoma.
West = Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, Washington, Oregon, and California.
Source: U.S. EPA, 1984b.
Page
11-16
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume il - food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
Table 11-12. Consumption of Meat, Poultry, and Dairy Products for Different Age Groups (averaged across sex), and
Estimated Lifetime Average Intakes for 70 Kg Adult Citizens Calculated from the FDA Diet Data.
Produce
Baby Toddler
(0-1 yrs) 1-6 yrs)
Beef ; 3.99 9.66
Beef Liver 0.17 0.24
Lamb 0.14 0.08
Pork. 1.34 4.29
Poultry 2.27 3.76
Dairy 40.70 32.94
Eggs 3.27 6.91
Beef Fat 2.45 6.48
Beef Liver Fat 0.05 0.07
Lamb Fat 0.14 0.08
Dairy Fal 38.99 16.48
Pork Fat 2.01 8.19
Poultry Fat 1.10 0.83
1 The estimated lifetime dietary intakes were estimated by:
Estimated lifetime intake = CRO.I) + Syre
where CR =
Source: U.S
the consumption rate for a specific age group.
EPA, 1989.
Child Teen
(6-14 yrs) ,(14-20 yrs)
g - dry weight/day
15.64
0.30
0.06
6.57
5.39
38.23
7.22
11.34
0.08
0.07
20.46
10.47
1.12
CR(l-5)+Si
21.62
0.36
0.05
8.86
7.03
43.52
' ' "7.52
16.22
0.10
0.06
24.43
12.75
1.41
ns CR (6-13) + 6 vis CR (14-19)
70 years
Adult
(20-45 yrs)
23.28
1.08
0.30
10.27
7.64
27.52
8.35
20.40
0.29
0.31
18.97
14.48
1.54
+ 25 vis ซCR (20-44)-
Old Estimated
(45-70 yrs) Lifetime Intake'
18.34
1.2
0.21
9.94
6.87
22.41
9.33
14.07
0.33
0.22
14.51
13.04
1.31
H25yisซCR(45-f70)
19.25
0.89
0.20
9.05
6.70
28.87
8.32
15.50
0.25
0.21
18.13
12.73
1.34
Table 11-13. Per Capita Consumption of Meat and Poultry in 1991'
Food Hern
Per Capita Consumption
Carcass1'Weight
(EftfaW
Per Capita
Consumption RTC
Per Capita Consumption Retail Cut
Equivalent4
Per Capita Consumption Boneless
Trimmed Equivalent*
Red Meal
Beef
Veal
Pork
Lamb and Mutton
Total'
118.3
1.5
8.0
2.0
201.7
82.8
1.2
62.1
1.7
147.9
78.4
0.99
58.3
1.2
139.1
Poultry
Young Chicken
Other Chicken
Chicken
Turkey '
' Total'
91.3
22.2
109.2
78.3
1.7
_
.
54.5"
17.5"
Includes processed meats and poultry in a fresh basis; excludes shipments lo U.S. territories; uses U.S. total population, July 1. and does not include residents of
the U.S. territories.
Beef-Carcass-Weight is the weight of the chilled hanging carcass, which includes the kidney and attached internal fat {kidney, pelvic, and heart fat (kph)] but not
head, feet, and unattached internal organs. Definitions of carcass weight for other red meats differ slightly.
RTC - ready-to-cook poultry weight is the entire dressed bird which includes bones, skin, fat, liver, heart, gizzard, and neck.
Retail equivalents in 1991 were converted from carcass weight by multiplying by a factor of 0.7,0.83,0.89, and 0.776 for beef, veal, lamb, and pork, respectively,
0.877 was the factor used each for young chicken and other chicken.
Boneless equivalent for red meat derived from carcass weight in 1991 by using conversion factors of 0.663,0.685,0.658 and 0.729 for beef, veal, lamb, and pork,
respectively; 0.597,0.597 and 0.790 were the factors used for young chicken, other chicken, and turkey.
Original data were presented in Ibs; converted to g/day by multiplying by a factor of 453.6 g/lb and dividing by 365 days/yr.
Computed from unrounded data.
Includes skin, neck, and giblets.
Excludes amount of RTC chicken going to pet food as well as some water leakage that occurs when chicken is cut-up before packaging.
Source: USDA. 1993
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
11-17
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
Table 11-14. Per Capita Consumption of Dairy Products in 1991' (
Food Item Per Capita
Consumption (g/day)*
Eggs
Farm Weight" 37.8
Retail Weigh?-' 37.3
Fluid Milk and Cream 289.7
Plain Whole Milk 105.3
Lowfat Plain Milk (2%) 98. 1
Lowfat Plain Milk (1%) 25.8
Skim Plain Milk 29.7
Whole Flavored Milk and Drink 3.4
Lowfat Flavored Milk and Drink 8.5
Buttermilk (lowfat and skim) 4.2
Half and Half Cream 3.9
Light Cream 0.4
Heavy Cream 1.6
Sour Cream 3.2
Eggnog 0.5
Evaporated and Condensed Milk"
Canned Whole Milk 2.6
Bulk Whole Milk 1.4
Bulk and Canned Skim Milk 6.2
Total1 10.2
Dry Milk Products?
Dry Wliolc Milk 0.5
Nonfat Dry Milk 3.2
Dry Buttermilk 0.3
Total* 4.0
Dried Whey 4.5
Butter 5.2
Food Item Per Capita
Consumption (g/day)1
Cheese
American
Cheddar
Other4
Italian
Provolone
Romano
Parmesan
Mozzarella
Ricotta
Other
Miscellaneous
Swiss'
Brick
Muenster
Cream
Neufchatel
Blue*
Other
Processed Products
Cheese
Foods and spreads
Cheese Content
Consumed as Natural
Cottage Cheese (lowfat)
Frozen Dairy Products
Ice Cream
Ice Milk
Sherbet
Other Frozen Products'1
Total'
All Diary Products
USDA Donations
Commercial Sales
Total
11.2
2.5
0.8
0.2
0.6
,9.0
1.0
0.07
1.5
0.07
0.5
1.9
0.3
0.2
1.2
6.1
4.7
8.5
22.6
.1.6
20.3.
9.2
1.5
5.3
36.4
17.1
685.2
7024
1 All per capita consumption figures use U.S. total populations, except fluid milk and cream data, which are based on U.S. residential
population. For eggs, excludes shipments to U.S. territories, uses U.S. total population, July 1, which does not include U.S. territories.
A dozen eggs converted at 1 .57 pounds.
The factor for converting farm weight to retail weight was 0.97 in 1960 and was increased 0.003 per year until 0.985 was reached in
1990.
Includes Colby, washed curd, Monterey, and Jack.
Computed from unrounded data.
Includes imports of Gruyere and Emmenthalcr.
Includes Gorgonzola.
Includes mcllorinc, frozen yogurt beginning 1981, and other nonstandardized frozen diary products.
Includes quantities used in oilier dairy products.
Original data were presented in Ibs, conversions to g/day were calculated by multiplying by a factor of 453.6 and dividing by 365 days.
Source: USDA, 1993.
Page
11-18
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dziry Products
Table 11-15. Adult Mean Daily Intake (as consumed) of Meat and Poultry Grouped by Region and Gender*
Food Item
Pacific
Male Female
Mean Daily Intake (g/day)
Region
Mountain North Central Northeast
Male Female Male Female Male Female
South
Male Female
Beef .
Pork .
Lamb
Veal
Variety
Meats/Game
Processed Meats
Poultry ,
84.8
18.6
1.3
0.4
11.1
22.8
67.3
52.8
12.6
1.2
0.2
7.9
15.4
56.1
89.8
23.7
0.5
0.2
9.1
22.9
51.0
59.6
16.8
0.3
0.2
7.4
13.2
45.2
86.8
26.5
0.4
0.4
11.9
26.3
51.7
55.9
18.8
0.4
" 0.4
8.0
15.8
44.7
71.8
22.4
1.3
2.8
8.1
21.2
56.2
46.6
15.9
1.0
1.5
6.8
15.5
49.2
87.3
24.4
0.5
0.3
9.4
26.0
57.7
54.9
17.2
0.3
0.3
7.8
17.0
50.2
1 Adult population represents consumers ages 19 and above.
NOTE: Pacific = Washington, Oregon and California
Mountain = Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, and Nevada
North Central = Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota,
Nebraska, and Kansas.
Northeast = Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, and
Pennsylvania.
South = Maryland, Delaware, District of Columbia, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia,
Florida, Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas, and Oklahoma.
Source: National Livestock and Meat Board, 1993.
Table 11-16. Amount (as consumed) of Meat Consumed by Adults Grouped by Frequency of Eatings'
Percent of Eaters
Percent of Total
Total
Consumption for
Median Daily
Intake
Frequency of Eatings
Non-Meat Eaters"
Light Meat Eaters1'
Medium Meat Eaters1 .
Heavy Meat Eaters'"
Eaters
1%
30%
33%
36%
Male
20
27
39
73
Female
80
73
61
27
(g)
None
<1025
1025-1584
>1548
None
54
93
144
' A female who is employed and on a diet. She lives alone or in a small household (without children).
h Female who may or may not be on a diet. There are probably 2-4 people in her household but that number is not likely to include children.
' This person may be of either sex, might be on a diet, and probably lives in a household of 2-4 people, which may include children.
11 Male who is not on a diet and lives in a household of 2-4 individuals, which may include children.
c Adult population represents consumers ages 19 and above.
Source: National Livestock and Meat Board. 1993.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
11-19
-------
Volume II- Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
Table 11-17. Percentage Lipid Content (Expressed as Percentages of 100 Grams of Edible Portions)
of Selected Meat and Dairy Products'
Product
Meals
Beef
Lean only
Lean and fat, 1/4 in. fat trim
Brisket (point Italf)
Lean and fat
Brisket (flat half)
Lean and fat
Lean only
Pork
Lean only
Lean and fat
Cured shoulder, blade roll, lean and fat
Cured ham, lean and fat
Cured hsm, lean only
Sausage
Ham
Ham
Lamb
Lean
Lean and fat
Veal
Lean
Lean and fat
Rabbit
Composite of cuts
Chicken
Meat only
Meat and skin
Turkey
Meat only
Meat and skin
Ground
Fat Percentage
6.16
9.91
19.24
21.54
22.40
4.03
5.88
9.66
14.95
17.18
20.02
12.07
7.57
38.24
4.55
9.55
5.25
9.52
21.59
20.94
2.87
6.58
6.77
11.39
5.55
8.05
3.08
7.41
15.06
13.60
2.86
4.97
8.02
9.73
6.66
Comment
Raw
Cooked
Raw
Cooked
Raw
Raw
Raw
Cooked
Raw
Cooked
Untreated
Center slice
Raw, center, country style
Raw, fresh
Cooked, extra lean (5% fat)
Cooked, (11% fat)
Raw
Cooked
Raw
Cooked
Raw
Cooked
Raw
Cooked
Raw
Cooked
Raw
Cooked
Raw
Cooked . , '
Raw
Cooked
Raw
Cooked
Raw
Page
11-20
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
Table 1 1-17. Percentage Lipid Content (Expressed as Percentages of 100 Grams of Edible Portions)
Product
Dairy
Milk
Whole
Human
Lowfat (1%)
Lowfat (2%)
Skim
Cream
Half and half
Medium
Heavy-whipping
Sour
Butter
Cheese
American
Cheddar
Swiss
Cream
Parmesan
Cottage
Colby
Blue
Provolone
Mozzarella
Yogurt
Eggs
1 Based on the lipid content in 100 grams,
Source: USDA, 1979-1986.
of Selected Meat and Dairy Products'
Fat Percentage
3.16
4.17
0.83
1.83
0.17
,.
18.32
23.71
35.09
19:88
76.93
29.63
31.42
26.02
33.07
24.50; 28.46
1.83
30.45
27.26
25.24
20.48
1.47
8.35
edible portion.
Comment
3.3% fat, raw or pasteurized
Whole, mature, fluid
Fluid
Fluid
Fluid
Table or coffee, fluid
25% fat, fluid
Fluid
Cultured
Regular
Pasteurized
Hard; grated
.Lowfat, 2% fat
Plain, lowfat
Chicken, whole raw, fresh or frozen
Table 11-18.
Meat Product
3-oz cooked serving (85.05 e)
Beef, retail composite, lean only
Pork, retail composite, lean only
Lamb, retail composite, lean only
Veal, retail composite, lean only
Broiler chicken, flesh only
Turkey, flesh only
Source: National Livestock and Meat Board 1993
Fat Content of Meat Products
Total Fat
(E)
8.4
8.0
8.1
5.6
6.3
4.2
Percent Fat
9.9
9.4
9.5
6.6
7.4
4.9
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
11-21
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
Table 1 1-19. Fat Intake. Contribution of Various Food Groups to Fat Intake, and Percentage of the Population in
Various Meat Kater Groups of the U.S. Population
Average Fat Intake (g)
Percent of Population
Meat Group (%)'
Bread Group (%)
Milk Group (%)
Fruits (56)
Vegetables (%)
Fats/oil/swccts (%)
Total
Population
68.3
100
41
24
12
1
9
13
' Meat Group includes meat, poultry, dry. beans, eggs,
Source: National Livestock and MeatBoard, 1993.
Heavy Meat
Eaters
84.5
36
44
23
11
1
9
12
and nuts.
Medium Meat
Eaters
62.5
33
40
24
13
1
9
13
Light Meat
Eaters
53.5
30
37
26
14
1
9
14
Non-Meat
32.3
1
33
25
14
1
11
17
Age
(yrs)
2-11 (months)
1-2
3-5
6-11
12-16
16-19
20-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-69
70-79
sSO
Total
>2
1 Total dietary fat
drinking water).
Table 11-20
N
871
1,231
1,647
1,745
711
785
1,882
1,628
1,228
929
1,108
851
809
14,801
13.314
intake includes all
. Mean Total Daily Dietary Fat Intake (g/day) Grouped by Age and Gender1
Total
Mean Fat Intake
(g/day)
37.52
49.96
60.39
74.17
85.19
100.50
97.12
93.84
84.90
79.29
69.15
61.44
54.61
81.91
82.77
N
439
601
744
868
338
308
844
736
626
473
646
444
290
7,322
6.594
fat (i.e., saturated and unsaturated)
Males
Mean Fat Intake
(g/day)
38.31
51.74
70.27
79.45
101.94
123.23
, 118.28
114.28
99.26
96.11
80.80
73.35
68.09
97.18
98.74
Females
N
432
630
803
877
373
397
638
791
602
456
560
407
313
7,479
8,720
Mean Fat Intake
36.95
48.33
61.51
68.95
71.23
77.46
76.52
74.06
70.80
63.32
59.52
53.34
47.84
67.52
68.06
derived from consumption of foods and beverages (excluding plain
Source: Adapted from CDC. 1994.
Page
11-22
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II- Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
Table 11-21. Percentage Mean Moisture Content (Expressed as Percentages of 100 Grains of Edible Portions)'
Food
Meat
Beef
Beef liver
Chicken (light meat)
Chicken {dark meat)
Duck : domestic
Duck - wild
Goose - domestic
Ham - cured
Horse
Lamb
Lard
Pork
Rabbit - domestic
Turkey
Dairy Products
Eggs
Butter
Cheese American pasteurized
Cheddar
Swiss
Parmesan, hard
Parmesan, grated
Cream, whipping, heavy
Cottage, lowfat
Colby
Blue
Cream
Yogurt
Plain, lowfat
Plain, with fat
Human milk - estimated
from USDA Survey
Human
Skim
Lowfat
* Based on the water content in
Source: USDA, 1979-1986.
Moisture Content Percent
71.60
68.99
74.86
75.99 "
73.77
75.51
68.30
66.92
72.63
63.98
73.42
0.00
70.00
72.81
69.11
74.16
74.57
15.87
39.16
36.75
37.21
29.16
17.66
57.71
79.31
38.20
42.41
53.75
85.07
87.90
87.50
90.80
90.80
100 grams, edible portion.
Comments
Raw, composite, trimmed, retail cuts
Raw
Raw, without skin
Raw, without skin
Raw
Raw
Raw
Raw
Raw, roasted
Cooked, roasted
Raw, composite, trimmed, retail cuts
Raw
Raw
Raw, roasted
Cooked, roasted
Raw
Raw
Regular
Made from whole milk
Whole, mature, fluid
1%
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
11-23
-------
Volume IIซ Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
ฃ
1
tn
&
fc
2
i
0
5
l
11-22. SummaiyofMeai,
JU
.n
ra
t-
u
4
^
fc
.|
D
Types of Data Used
S
o
II
fS
-3
w
t
V3
so*
ll I
il 1
II tง
ป .1? 'i 1.
ll 1'^
il- il
tg g E to 3
s 1 s a i
s
ฃ
S
8 "S
eo ง
| 1
ซ
cB
I
s
"H a
I -3
M J>
11 |
Et . 81
8 " s fe :>
-gs Si
ง!ป ^^
s|a K-?
ซ CQ .5 <-< en
.S
w
M
i
t-g
n 23
f II
O S
.6 31
ง 1
| || & e
ell ฃ3 ^ ! ^
>< < ol ^ .J
w S32 ฃ ซ
8B ^ " '
a & ง, -S 1 1 1
i f|| I ii ii p I
B" ^ o-'^S " ~ S gi.2: s ซ u
11 Jl| ง ^ i ll ll t
"S ^ '1 1 8. 1 ซ o a" | i ~ iฐ"
|| Ifl | || |J |1 |
ii |jj if i| if. |! Il
21 III 111! Ill III!
a
u
ง "S "2 "S "S
S S E 6 ง2
8 | | g 1 's"
*^ o o o S
_| S S3 S S 1" '
| ฃ | 1 1 1 1
OO DO GO OJ) DO CO BO
a ~ s '
If S. - t"??-
11 1 1 1 ill ll 1
งajjii s? i !? 1 1 1 1 1 1 ll ง 1 1
ป-J EL'S (i ซ en is -H S 03 U- 12
a t s
o 2 ฐ eo p^
t It 1 si IS 1
ฃ .a | I" .1 1" .1 f a 1
< (Sซ
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors . ^ivr
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products -^ *
Table 1 1-23. Summary of Recommended Values for Per Capita Intake of
Meat and Dairy Products and Serving Size
Mean
Total Meat Intake
2.1 g/kg-day
Total Dairy Intake
8.0 g/kg-day
Individual Meat and Dairy Products
see Table 11-3
Serving Size
see Table 11 -4
95th Percentile Multiple Percentiles Study
5.1 g/kg-day see Table 1 1-1 EPA Analysis of CSFII 1989-91
29.7 g/kg-day see Table 1 1-2 EPA Analysis of CSFII 1989-91
see Table U-3 see Table 11-3 . EPA Analysis of CSFII 1989-91
see Table 1 1-4 see Table 11-4 Paoet al., 1982
Data
Data
Data
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
11-25
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
Table 11-24. Confidence in Meats and Dairy Products Intake Recommendation
Considerations
Rationale
Rating
Study Elements
Level of peer review
Accessibility
Repraducibility
Focus oa factor of interest
Data pertinent to U.S.
Primary data
Currency
Adequacy of data collection period
Validity of approach
Study size
Representativeness of the population
Characterization of variability
Lack of bias in study design (high rating is desirable)
Measurement error
Other Elements
Number of studks
Agreement between researchers
Overall Rating
USDA CSFII survey receives high level of peer
review. EPA analysis of these data has not been peer
reviewed outside the Agency. (Peer review will be
conducted as part of the peer review of this
Handbook)
CSFII data is publicly available
Enough information is included to reproduce results
Analysis is specifically designed to address food
intake
Data focuses on the U.S. population
This is new analysis of primary data
Is the most current data publicly available
Survey is designed to collect short-term data.
Survey methodology was adequate
Study size was very large and therefore adequate
The population studied was the U.S. population.
Survey was not designed to capture long term day-to-
day variability. Short term distributions are provided
for various age groups, regions, etc.
Response rate was adequate?
No measurements were taken. The study relied on
survey data.
CSFII is the most recent data publicly available.
Therefore, it was the only study classified as key
study.
Although the CSFII was the only study classified as
key study, the results are in good agreement with
earlier data.
The survey is representative of U.S. population;
Although there was only one study considered key,
these data are the most recent and are in agreement
with earlier data; the approach used to analyzed the
data was adequate. However, due to the limitations
of the survey design estimation of long-term
percentile values (especially the upper percentiies) fa
uncertain.
Medium (This will become a
"high" once the Handbook's
peer review fa completed)
High
High
High
High
High
High
Medium confidence for
average values;
Low confidence for long term
percentile distribution
High
High
High
Medium
Medium
N/A
Low
High
High confidence in the
average;
Low confidence in the long-
term upper percentiies
Page
11-26
Exposure Factors Handbook
Aueust 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
Table 11-25.
Considerations
Study- Elements
Level of peer review
Accessibility
Reproducibility
Focus on factor of interest
Data pertinent to U.S.
Primary data
Currency
Adequacy of data collection
period
Validity of approach
Study size
Representativeness of the
population
Characterization of variability
Lack of bias in study design
(high rating is desirable)
Measurement error
Other Elements
Number of studies
Agreement between researchers
Overall Rating
Confidence in Meat and Dairy Serving Size Recommendations
Rationale
USDA MFCS survey receives high level of peer review.
The NFCS data are publicly available
Methodology is clearly explained
Analysis is specifically designed to address food intake
Data focuses on the U.S. population
The study analyzed primary data
Tlic data arc old (i.e. 1977-78)
Survey is designed to collect short-term data.
Survey methodology was adequate
Study size was very large and therefore adequate
The population studied was the U.S. population.
Survey was not designed to capture long term day-to-day
variability. Short term distributions are provided
Response rate was adequate
No measurements were taken. The study relied on survey
data.
1
Although serving size data may have been collected in other
surveys, they have not been reported in any other study.
The survey is representative of U.S. population; the approach
used to analyzed the data was adequate. However, due to the
limitations of the survey design estimation of long-term
percentile values (especially the upper percentiles) is uncertain.
Rating
High
High
High
High
High
High
Low
Medium
High
High
High
Medium
Medium
N/A
Low
Low
Medium
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
11-27
-------
-------
Volume II - food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
APPENDIX 11A
Sample Calculation of Mean DaHy Fat Intake Based on CDC (1994) Data
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
11A-1
-------
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 11 - Intake of Meat and Dairy Products
Sample Calculation of Mean Daily Fat Intake Based on CDC (1994) Data
0.34 x 2,095 kcal x X = 82 g-fat
:. X = 0.115
g-fat
kcal
X is the conversion factor from kcal/day to g-fat/day. An example of obtaining the grams of fat from the daily TFEI
(1591 kcal/day) for children ages 3-5 and their percent TFEI from total dietary fat (33 percent) is as follows:
1,591 x 0.33 x 0.12 ฃ-&- = 63 ^
day kcal day
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
11A-3
-------
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
12. INTAKE RATES FOR VARIOUS HOME
PRODUCED FOOD ITEMS
12.1. BACKGROUND
Ingestion of contaminated foods is a potential
pathway of exposure to toxic chemicals. Consumers of
home produced food products may be of particular concern
because exposure resulting from local site contamination
may be higher for this subpopulation. According to a
survey by the National Gardening Association (1987), a
total of 34 million (or 38 percent) U.S. households
participated in vegetable gardening in 1986. Table 12-1
contains demographic data on vegetable gardening in 1986
by region/section, community size, and household size.
gardeners. Home-produced foods can become contaminated
in a variety of ways. Ambient pollutants in the air may be
deposited on plants, adsorbed onto or absorbed by the
Table 12-1. 1986 Vegetable Gardening by Demographic Factors
Demographic
Factor
Total
Region/section
East
New England
Mid-Atlantic
Midwest
East Central
West Central
South
Deep South
Rest of South
West
Rocky Mountain
Pacific
Size of community
City
Suburb
Small town
Rural
Household size
Single, separated,
divorced, widowed
Married, no children
Married, with children
Percentage of
total households
that have gardens
(%)
38
33
37
32
50
50
50
33
44
29
37
53
32
26
33
32
61
54
45
44
Number of
households
(million)
34
7.3
1.9
5.4
11.0
6.6
4.5
9.0
3.1
5.9
6.2
2.3
4.2
6.2
10.2
3.4
14.0
8.5
11.9
13.2
Source: National Gardening Association, 1987.
Table 12-2 contains information on the types of vegetables
grown by home gardeners in 1986. Tomatoes, peppers,
onions, cucumbers, lettuce, beans, carrots, and corn are
among the vegetables grown by the largest percentage of
Table 12-2. Percentage of Gardening Households
Growing Different Vegetables in 1986
Vegetable
Percent
Artichokes
Asparagus
JJeans
Beets
Broccoli
Brussel sprouts
Cabbage
Carrots
Cauliflower
Celery
ClianI
Corn
Cucumbers
Dried peas
Dry beans
Eggplant
Herbs
Kale
Kohlrabi
Leeks
Lettuce
Melons
Okra
Onions
Oriental vegetables
Parsnips
Peanuts
Peas
Peppers
Potatoes
Pumpkins
Radishes
Rhubarb
Spinach
Summer squash
Sunflowers
Sweet potatoes
Tomato
Turnips
Winter squash
0.8
8.2
43.4
20.6
19.6
5.7
29.6
34.9
14.0
5.4
3.5
34.4
49.9
2.5
8.9
13.0
9.8
3.1
3.0
1.2
41.7
21.9
13.6
50.3
2.1
2.2
1.9
29.0
57.7
25.5
10.2
30.7
12.2
10.2
25.7
8.2
5.7
85.4
10.7
11.1
Source: National Gardening Association, 1987.
plants, or dissolved in rainfall or irrigation waters that
contact the plants. Pollutants may also be adsorbed onto
plants roots from contaminated soil and water. Finally, the
addition of pesticides, soil additives, and fertilizers to crops
or gardens may result in contamination of food products.
Meat and dairy products can become contaminated if
animals consume contaminated soil, water, or feed crops.
Intake rates for home-produced food products are needed to
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
12-1
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
assess exposure to local contaminants present in
homegrown or home caught foods. Recently, EPA analy/ed
data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA)
Nationwide Food Consumption Survey (NFCS) to generate
distributions of intake rates for home-produced foods. The
methods used and the results of these analyses are presented
below.
12.2. METHODS
Nationwide Food Consumption Survey (NFCS) data
were used to generate intake rates for home-produced foods.
USDA conducts the NFCS every 10 years to analyze the
food consumption behavior and dietary status of Americans
(USDA, 1992). The most recent NFCS was conducted in
1987-88. The survey used a statistical sampling technique
designed to ensure that all seasons, geographic regions of
the 48 conterminous states in the U.S., and socioeconomic
and demographic groups were represented (USDA, 1994).
There were two components of the NFCS. The household
component collected information over a'seven-day period
on the socioeconomic and demographic characteristics of
households, and the types, amount, value, and sources of
foods consumed by the household (USDA, 1994). The
individual intake component collected information on food
intakes of individuals within each household over a three-
day period (USDA, 1993). The sample size for the 1987-
88 survey was approximately 4,300 households (over
10,000 individuals). This is a decrease over the previous
survey conducted in 1977-78 which sampled approximately
15,000 households (over 36,000 individuals) (USDA,
1994). The sample size was lower in the 1987-88 survey
as a result of budgetary constraints and low response rate
(i.e., 38 percent for the household survey and 31 percent for
the individual survey) (USDA, 1993). However, NFCS
data from 1987-88 were used to generate homegrown
intake rates because they were the most recent data
available and were believed to be more reflective of current
eating patterns among the U.S. population.
The USDA data were adjusted by applying the
sample weights calculated by USDA to the data set prior to
analysis. The USDA sample weights were designed to
"adjust for survey non-response and other vagaries of the
sample selection process" (USDA, 1987-88). Also, the
USDA weights arc calculated "so that the weighted sample
total equals the known population total, in thousands, for
several characteristics thought to be correlated with eating
behavior" (USDA, 1987-88).
For the purposes of this study, home-produced foods
were defined as homegrown fruits and vegetables, meat and
dairy products derived from consumer-raised livestock or
game meat, and home caught fish. The food items/groups
selected for analysis included major food groups (i.e., total
fruits, total vegetables, total meats, total dairy, total fish and
shellfish), individual food items for which >30 households
reported eating the home-produced form of the item, fruits
and vegetables categorized as exposed, protected, and roots,
and various USDA fruit and vegetable subcategories (i.e.,
dark green vegetables, citrus fruits, etc.). Food
items/groups were identified in the NFCS data base
according to NFCS-defined food codes. Appendix 12A
presents the codes used to determine the various food
groups.
Although the individual intake component of the
NFCS gives the best measure of the amount of each food
item eaten by each individual in the household, it could not
be used directly to measure consumption of home produced
food because the individual component does not identify the
source of the food item (i.e., as home produced or not).
Therefore, an analytical method which incorporated data
from both the household and individual survey components
was developed to estimate individual home produced food
intake. The USDA household data were used to determine
(1) the amount of each home produced food item used
during a week by household members and (2) the number
of meals eaten in the household by each household member
during a week. Note that the household survey reports the
total amount of each food item used in the household
(whether by guests or household members); the amount
used by household members was derived by multiplying the
total amount used in the household by the proportion of all
meals served in the household (during the survey week) that
were consumed by household members.
The individual survey data was used to generate
average sex- and age-specific serving sizes for each food
item. The age categories used in the analysis were as
follows: 1 to 2 years; 3 to 5 years; 6 to 11 years; 12 to 19
years; 20 to 39 years; 40 to 69 years; and over 70 years
(intake rates were not calculated for children under 1; the
rationale for this is discussed below). These serving sizes
were used during subsequent analyses to generate
homegrown food intake rates for individual household
members. Assuming that the proportion of the household
quantity of each homegrown food item/group was a function
of the number of meals and the mean sex- and age-specific
serving size for each family member, individual intakes of
home produced food were calculated for all members of the
survey population using the following general equation:
Page
12-2
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
m q
(Eqn. 12-1)
where:
Wj = Homegrown amount of food item/group attributed to
member i during the week (g/week);
W, = Total quantity of homegrown food item/group used by
the family members (g/week);
m, ,= Number of meals of household food consumed by
member i during the week (meals/week); and
QJ = Serving size for an individual within the age and sex
category of the member (g/meal).
Daily intake of a homegrown food item/group was
determined by dividing the weekly value (wf) by seven.
Intake rates were indexed to the self-reported body weight
of the survey respondent and reported in units of g/kg-day.
Intake rates were not calculated for children under one year
of age because their diet differs markedly from that of other
household members, and thus the assumption that all
household members share all foods would be invalid for this
age group. In Section 12.5, a method for estimating per-
capita homegrown intake in this age group is suggested.
For the major food groups (fruits, vegetables, meats,
dairy, and fish) and individual foods consumed by at least
30 households, distributions of home produced intake
among cpnsumers were generated for the entire data set and
according to the following subcategories: age groups,
urbanization categories, seasons, racial classifications,
regions, and responses to the questionnaire.
Consumers were defined as members of survey
households who reported consumption of the food
item/group of interest during the one week survey period. In
addition, for the major food groups, distributions were
generated for each region by season, urbanization, and
responses to the questionnaire. Table 12-3 presents the
codes, definitions, and a description of the data included in
each of the subcategories. Intake rates were not calculated
for food items/groups for which less than 30 households
reported home-produced usage because the number of
observations may be inadequate for generating distributions
that would be representative of that segment of consumers.
Fruits and vegetables were also classified as exposed,
protected, or roots, as shown in Appendix 12A of this
document. Exposed foods are those that are grown above
ground and are likely to be contaminated, by pollutants
deposited on surfaces that are eaten. Protected products are
those that have outer protective coatings that are typically
removed before consumption. Distributions of intake were
tabulated for these food classes for the same subcategories
listed above. Distributions were also tabulated for the
following USDA food classifications: dark green
vegetables, deep yellow vegetables, other vegetables, citrus
fruits, and other fruits. Finally, the percentages of total
intake of the food items/groups consumed within survey
households that can be attributed to home production were
tabulated. The percentage of intake that was homegrown
was calculated as the ratio of total intake of the homegrown
food item/group by the survey population to the total intake
of all forms of the food by the survey population.
As disccussed in Section 12.3, percentiles of average
daily intake derived from short time intervals (e.g., 7 days)
will not, in general, be reflective of long term patterns. This
is especially true regarding consumption of many home
grown products (e.g., fruits, vegetables), where there is
often a strong seasonal component associated with their use.
To try to derive, for the major food categories, the long term
distribution of average daily intake rates from the short-term
data available here, an approach was developed which
attempted to account for seasonal variability in
consumption. This approach used regional "seasonally
adjusted distributions" to approximate regional long term
distributions and then combined these regional adjusted
distributions (in proportion to the weights for each region)
to obtain a U.S. adjusted distribution which approximated
the U.S. long term distribution.
The percentiles of the seasonally adjusted
distribution for a given region are generated by averaging
the corresponding percentiles of each of the four seasonal
distributions of the region. More formally, the seasonally
adjusted distribution for each region is such that its inverse
cumulative distribution function is the average of the
inverse cumulative distribution functions of each of the
seasonal distributions of that region. The use of regional
seasonally adjusted distributions to approximate regional
long term distributions is based on the assumption that each
individual consumes at the same regional percentile levels
for each season and consumes at a constant weekly rate
throughout a given season. Thus, for instance, if the 60th
percentile weekly intake level in the South is 14.0 g in the
summer and 7.0 g in each of the three other seasons, then an
individual in the South with an average weekly intake of
14.0 g over the summer would be assumed to have an
intake of 14.0 g for each week of the summer and an intake
of 7.0 g for each week of the other seasons.
Note that the seasonally adjusted distributions
derived above were generated using the overall
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
12-3
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12- Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
Code
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
Definition
Northeast
Midwest
South
West
Central City
Suburban
Nonmetropolitan
Includes Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York,
Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont
Includes Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North
Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin
Includes Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia,
Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina,
Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia
Includes Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon,
Utah, Washington, and Wyoming
Cities with populations of 50,000 or more that is the main city within the metropolitan
statistical area (MSA).
An area that is generally within the boundaries of an MSA, but is not within the legal limit
of the central city.
1
2
3
4
5.8,9
Grow
Raise
Animals
Fish/Hunt
Farm
Spring
Summer
Fall
Winter
Other/NA
Question 75
Question 76
Question 77
Question 79
-
" Alaska and Hawaii were not included.
Source: USDA 1987-88.
White (Caucasian)
Black
Asian and Pacific Islander
Native American, Aleuts, and Eskimos
Don't know, no answer, some other race
Did anyone in Hie household grow any vegetables or fruit for use in the liouschold?
Did anyone in UK taseliold produce any animal products such as milk, eggs, meat, or
poultry for home use in your household?
Did anyone in the household catch any fish or shoot game for home use?
Did anyone in the household operate a farm or ranch'
April, May, June
July, August, September
October, November, December
January, February, March
distributions, i.e., both consumers and non-consumers.
However, since all the other distributions presented in this
section arc based on consumers only, the percentiles for the
adjusted distributions have been revised to reflect the
percentiles among consumers only. Given the above
assumption about how each individual consumes, the
percentage consuming for the seasonally adjusted
distributions give an estimate of the percentage of the
population consuming the specified food category at any
time during the year.
The intake data presented here for consumers of
home-produced foods and the total number of individuals
surveyed may be used to calculate the mean and the
percentiles of the distribution of home produced food
consumption in the overall population (consumers and non-
consumers) as follows:
Page
12-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Vari^u^ Home Produced Food Items
Assuming that w,, is the homegrown amount of food
item/group at the p"1 percentile, NH is the weighted
number of households who are users of the
homegrown food item, and NA is the weighted
number of all households surveyed; then, (NA - NH)
is the weighted number of households who reported
zero homegrown consumption. There are (p/100) x
NH households below the plh percentile. Therefore,
wp is the
lOOx-l
percent
(Eqn. 12-2)
of the overall distribution of homegrown food
consumption. The mean in the overall population is
calculated by multiplying the mean among
consumers by the proportion consuming, NH/NA
Table 12-4 displays the weighted numbers NA, as
well as the unweighted total survey sample sizes, for each
subcategory and overall. It should be noted that the total
unweighted number of observations in Table 12-4 (9,852)
is somewhat lower than the number of observations
reported by USDA because this study only used
observations for family members for which age and body
weight were specified.
As mentioned above, the intake rates derived in this
section are based on the amount of household food
consumption. As measured by the NFCS, the amount of
food "consumed" by the household is a measure of
consumption in an economic sense, i.e., a measure of the
weight of food brought into the household that has been
consumed (used up) in some manner. In addition to food
being consumed by persons, food may be used up by
spoiling, by being discarded (e.g., inedible parts), through
cooking processes, etc.
USDA estimated preparation losses for various
foods (USDA, 1975). For meats, a net cooking loss,
which includes dripping and volatile losses, and a net post
cobking loss, which involves losses from cutting, bones,
excess fat, scraps and juices, were derived for a variety of
cuts and cooking methods. For each meat type (e.g., beef)
EPA has averaged these losses across all cuts and cooking
methods to obtain a mean net cooking loss and a mean net
post cooking loss; these are displayed in Table 12-5. For
individual fruits and vegetables, USDA (1975) also gave
cooking and post-cooking losses. These data are presented
in Tables 12-6 and 12-7.
The following formulas can be used to convert the
intake rates tabulated here to rates reflecting actual
consumption:
IA=Ix(l -
(Eqn. 12-3)
I.=Ix(l-Lp)
(Eqn. 12-4)
where IA is the adjusted intake rate, I the tabulated rate, L,
the cooking loss, L, post-cooking loss and L,, the paring
loss. For fruits, corrections based on cooking and
postcooking losses only apply to fruits that are eaten in
cooked forms (i.e., apples eaten as applesauce). For raw
forms of the fruits, paring or preparation loss data should be
used to correct for losses from removal of skin, peel, core,
caps, pits, stems, and defects, or draining of liquids from
canned or frozen forms. To obtain preparation losses for
food categories, the preparation losses of the individual
foods making up the category can be averaged.
In calculating ingestion exposure, assessors should
use consistent forms in combining intake rates with
contaminant concentrations. This issue has been previously
discussed in the other food Chapters.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996 ^^
Page
12-5
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
I:
8 S 3 S =3- a s * ฃ
= - co co ^ g co 2ซ
o is o\
2 3 ฃ;
583233?ฐ g ง S S
-. rl CO 00 l~ -. ^.O^p,
S 00 "^
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
Table 12-5. Percent Weight Losses from Preparation of Various Meals
Meat Type
Mean Net Cooking Loss (%)'
Mean Net Post Cooking Loss (%)h
Mean
Range of Means
Standard
Deviation
Mean
Range of Means
Standard
Deviation
Beef
Pork
Chicken
Turkey
Lamb
Veal
Fishc
Shellfish11
27.24
28.06
32.04
31.91
30.00
29.38
29.91
32.83
11.00 to 42.00
1.00 to 67.00
7.00 to 55.00
11.00 to 57.00
25.00 to 37.00
10.00 to 45.00
-19.00 to 81.00
1.00 to 94.00
7.08
9.71
8.69
6.97
4.85
10.79
18.90
29.50
24.17
35.86
31.10
28.45
34.00
24.67
11.26
10.00
10.00 to 46.00
14.00 to 52.00
16.00 to 51.00
8.00 to 48.00
14.00 to 61.00
18.00 to 37.00
1.00 to 26.00
10.00 to 10.00
9.34
11.41
7.84
10.07
13.74
8.73
6.42
0.00
Includes dripping and volatile losses during cooking. Averaged over various cuts and preparation methods.
Includes losses from cutting, shrinkage, excess fat, bones, scraps, and juices. Averaged over various cuts and preparation methods.
Averaged over a variety offish, to include: bass, bluefish, butterfish, cod, flounder, haddock, halibut, lake trout, makerel, perch, porgy,
red snapper, rockfish, salmon, sea trout, shad, smelt, sole, spot, squid, swordfish steak, trout, and whitefish.
J Averaged over a variety of shellfish, to include: clams, crab, crayfish, lobster, oysters, and shrimp and shrimp dishes.
Source: USDA. 1975. _^__
Table 12-6. Percent Weight Losses from. Preparation of Various Fruits
Mean Net Cooking Loss (%)
Mean Net Post Cooking Loss (%)b
Mean Paring or Preparation Loss (%)c-d
Type of Fruit Mean
Range of
Means
Standard
Deviation
Mean
Range of
Means
Standard
Deviation
Mean
Range of
Means
Standard
Apples
Pears
Peaches
Strawberries
Oranges
-70.9
-53.7
-145.0
-478 to 15
-113 to 19
-418 to 5
156.00
54.7
173.4
24.6
36.1
3 to 42
19 to 50
12.6
11.7
22.0C
22.0"
41.0"
24.0"
10.0'
30.0J
29.0'
13to40c
12to60c
25 to 47"
6 to 68C
6 to 14'
96to41J
19 to 38ฐ
NAฐ
NA=
NA"
NAC
NA<
14.9J
NAC
Includes losses from coring, peeling, stemming, trimming, draining, thawing, pitting, and defects, and-gains from the addition of water and
sugar. Averaged over various preparation methods.
Includes losses from draining cooked forms.
Includes losses from removal of skin or peel, core or pit, stems or caps, seeds and defects.
Includes losses from removal of drained liquids from canned or frozen forms.
Source: USDA. 1975
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
12-7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
Table 12-7. Percent Weight Losses from Preparation of Various Vegetables
Type of
Vegetable Mean
Asparagus 22.83
Beets 27.71
Broccoli 13.83
Cabbage 11.25
Carrots 19.13
Corn 25.67
Cucumbers 17.50
Lettuce 21.63
Lima Beans -12.20
Okra 11.83
Onions 4.54
Peas, green 2.00
Peppers 13.4(3
Pumpkins 19.00
Snap Beans 18.00
Tomatoes 15.13
Potatoes -21.83
Mean Net Cooking Loss (%)
Range of Means
5 to 47
4 to 60
Oto39
4 to 20
2 to 41
-1 to 64
5 to 40
6 to 36
-143 to 56
-10 to 40
-90 to 63
-147 to 62
3 to 27
8 to 30
5 to 42
2 to 34
-527 to 46
Standard
15.70
17.08
13.16
6.22
12.23
21.98
13.57
11.86
69.12
15.52
38.12
63.48
9.11
11.00
13.07
9.56
120.98
Mean Net Post Cooking Loss (%)*
Standard
" . '
-
-
-
-
21.63 1 to 33 10.86
Includes losses due to paring, trimming, flowering the stalk, thawing, draining, scraping, shelling, slicing, husking, chopping,
and dicing and gains from the addition of water, fat, or other ingredients. Averaged over various preparation methods.
Includes losses from draining or removal of skin.
Source: USDA. 1975
123. RESULTS
The intake rate distributions (among consumers) for
total home-produced fruits, vegetables, meats, fish and dairy
products arc shown, respectively, in Tables 12-8 through
12-32 (displayed at the end of Chapter 12). Also shown in
these tables is the proportion of respondents consuming the
item during the (one-week) survey period. Home grown
vegetables were the most commonly consumed of the major
food groups (18.3%), followed by fruit (7.8%), meat
(4.9%), fish (2.1%), and dairy products (0.7%). The intake
rates for the major food groups vary according to region,
age, urbanization code, race, and response to survey
questions. In general, intake rates of home produced foods
are higher among populations in non-metropolitan and
suburban areas and lowest in central city areas. Results of
the regional analyses indicate that intake of homegrown
fruits, vegetables, meat and dairy products is generally
highest for individuals in the Midwest and South and lowest
for those in the Northeast. Intake rates of home-caught fish
were generally highest among consumers in the South.
Homegrown intake was generally higher among individuals
who indicated that they operate a farm, grow their own
vegetables, raise animals, and catch their own fish. The
results of the seasonal analyses for all regions combined
indicated that, in general, homegrown fruits and vegetables
were eaten at a higher rate in summer, and home caught fish
was consumed at a higher rate in spring; however, seasonal
intake varied based on individual regions. Seasonally
adjusted intake rate distributions for the major food groups
are presented in Table 12-33.
Tables 12-34 through 12-60 present distributions of
intake for individual home-produced food items for
households that reported consuming the homegrown form
of the food during the survey period. Intake rate
distributions among consumers for homegrown foods
categorized as exposed fruits and vegetables, protected
fruits and vegetables, and root vegetables are presented in
Tables 12-61 through 12-65; the intake distributions for
various USDA classifications (e.g., dark green vegetables)
are presented in Tables 12-66 through 12-70. The results
are presented in units of g/kg-day. Table 12-71 presents the
fraction of household intake attributed to home-produced
forms of the food items/groups evaluated. Thus, use of
these data in calculating potential dose does not require the
Page
12-8
Exposure Factors Handbook
Aueust 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
body weight factor to be included in the denominator of the
average daily dose (ADD) equation. It should be noted that
converting these intake rates into units of g/day by
multiplying by a single average body weight is
inappropriate, because individual intake rates were indexed
to the actual body weights of the survey respondents.
However, if there is a need to compare the total intake data
presented here to other intake data in units of g/day, a body
weight less than 70 kg (i.e., approximately 60 kg; calculated
based oh the number of respondents in each age category
and the average body weights for these age groups, as
presented in Volume I, Chapter 7) should be used because
the total survey population included children as well as
adults.
12.4. ADVANTAGES AND LIMITATIONS
The USDA NFCS data set is the largest publicly
available source of information on food consumption habits
in the United States. The advantages of using this data set
are that it is expected to be representative of the U.S.
population and that it provides information on a wide
variety of food groups. However, the data collected by the
USDA NFCS are based on short-term dietary recall and the
intake distributions generated from them may not accurately
reflect long-term intake patterns, particularly with respect
to the tails (extremes) of the distributions. Also, the two
survey components (i.e., household and individual) do not
define food items/groups in a consistent manner; as a result,
some errors may be introduced into these analyses because
the two survey components are linked. The results
presented here may also be biased by assumptions that are
inherent in the analytical method utilized. The analytical
method may not capture all high-end consumers within
households because average serving sizes are used in
calculating the proportion of homegrown food consumed by
each household member. Thus, for instance, in a two-
person household where one member had high intake and
one had low intake, the method used here would assume
that both members had an equal and moderate level of
intake. In addition, the analyses assume that all family
members consume a portion of the home produced food
used within the household. However, not all family
memberS'inay consume each home produced food item and
serving sizes allocated here may not be entirely
representative of the portion of household foods consumed
by each family member. As was mentioned in Section 12.2,
no analyses were performed for the under 1 year age group
due to the above concerns. Below, in Section 12.5, a
recommended approach for dealing with this age group is
presented.
The preparation loss factors discussed in Section
12.2 are intended to convert intake rates based on
"household consumption" to rates reflective of what
individuals actually consume. However, these factors do
not include losses to spoilage, feeding to pets, food thrown
away, etc.
12.5. RECOMMENDATIONS
The distribution data presented in this study may be
used to assess exposure to contaminants in foods grown,
raised, or caught at a specific site. Table 12-72 presents the
confidence ratings for homegrown food intake. The
recommended values for mean intake rates among
consumers for the various home produced foods can be
taken from the tables presented here; these can be converted
to per capita rates by multiplying by the fraction consuming.
The data presented here for consumers of home-produced
foods represent average daily intake rates of food
items/groups over the seven-day survey period and do not
account for variations in eating habits during the rest of the
year; thus the percentiles presented here (except the
seasonally adjusted) are only valid when considering
exposures over time periods of about one week. Similarly,
the figures for percentage consuming are also only valid
over a one week time period. Since the tabulated
percentiles reflect the distribution among consumers only,
Eqn. 12-2 must be used to convert the percentiles shown
here to ones valid for the general population.
In contrast, the seasonally adjusted percentiles are
designed to give percentiles of the long term distribution of
average daily intake and the percentage consuming shown
with this distribution is designed to estimate the percent of
the population consuming at any time during a year.
However, because the assumptions mentioned in Section
12.2 can not be verified to hold, these upper percentiles
must be assigned a low confidence rating. Eqn. 12-2 may
also be used with this distribution to convert percentiles
among consumers to percentiles for the general population.
For all the rates tabulated here, preparation loss
factors should be applied where appropriate. The form of
the food used to estimate intake should be consistent with
the form used to measure contaminant concentration.
As described above, the tables do not display rates
for children under 1 year of age. For this age group, it is
recommended that per-capita homegrown consumption
rates be estimated using the following approach. First, for
each specific home produced food of interest, the ratio of
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
12-9
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
per capita intake for children under 1 year compared to that
of children 1 to 2 years is calculated using the USDA CSFH
1989-1991 results displayed in Volume II, Chapters 9 and
11. Note these results are based on individual food intakes;
however, they consider all sources of food, not just home
produced. Second, the per-capita intake rate in the 1 to 2
year age group of the home produced food of interest is
calculated as described above by multiplying the fraction
consuming by the mean intake rate among consumers (both
these numbers are displayed in the tables). Finally, the per
capita homegrown intake rate in children under 1 year of the
food of interest is estimated by multiplying the homegrown
per-capita intake rate in the 1 to 2 year age group by the
above ratio of intakes in the under 1 year age group as
compared to the 1 to 2 year age group.
The AIHC Sourcebook (AIHC, 1994) used data
presented in the 1989 version of the Exposure Factors
Handbook which reported data from the USDA 1977-78
MFCS. In this Handbook, new analyses of more recent data
from USDA were conducted. Numbers, however, cannot
be directly compared with previous values since the results
from the new analyses are presented on a body weight basis.
12.6. REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 12
American Industrial Health Council (AIHC) (1994)
Exposure factors sourcebook.. AIHC, Washington,
DC.
National Gardening Association. (1987) National
gardening survey: 1986-1987. Burlington,
Vermont: The National Gardening Association, Inc.
USDA. (1975) Food yields summarized by different
stages of preparation. Agriculture Handbook No.
102. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural
Research Service, Washington, DC.
USDA. (1987-88) Dataset: Nationwide Food
Consumption Survey 1987/88 Household Food Use.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Washington, D.C.
1987/88 NFCS Database.
USDA. (1992) Changes in food consumption and
expenditures in American households during the
1980's. U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Washington, D.C. Statistical Bulletin No. 849.
USDA. (1993) Food and nutrient intakes by individuals
in the United States, 1 Day, 1987-88. Nationwide
Food Consumption Survey 1987-88, NFCS Report
No. 87-1-1.
USDA. (1994) Food consumption and dietary levels of
households in the United States, 1987-88. U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research
Service. Report No. 87-H-l.
Page
12-10
Exposure Factors Handbook
Aueust 1996
-------
Volume H - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12- Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
f ??????? f ง
1 1111 2 ง 5 l|
f ? f ? f f ? 5
i i 11 i 11 i
s ??งงง??
a a 3 a a a S g
= $s 8 3 s Sj s
M> ซc - ii 5 _: ^
f ? f ? ? ?
ฃ3 H S3 PJ fi? ซ
f f f ? ?
g g 1 5 g
-:
f f ง ? S 8 8
I 1 I 5! I ง 1
m 2 2 xi r^ 2 Z2
? 3 5 ?
01 U U g
v ซ*ป ซrf 2
IIIIP
III I
f S |5
I gggsaag ^i?
aa!s&3ง2 ง R S i
ii il
?f
1333 SI! Sง !I
l!i! Hi IS f?
? Iff
II
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
12-11
-------
S
I
1
I
I
I
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
i I
I I
- i
.1.
i
282
jilll
s*'.
I
II
i
i
f ? 5 ? ?
ง | e f f
s Ssss
III I 5 f
ซ n oi
ill!
5
S ? s
f ?
ป
SiSS
S 5 8
I ]ซ!
ill
II
I
5
59
Si
" S
, I
11
fii
12-12
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
5 f f ? ? f
-; 5 2 z
III!
f ??? ?
8188 g
2 3 S S 5
Iff
liii
I III
I 11 III
i
'
s 2
,11
J
I
I li
I
I
ri -i ri n
f f
is
55
Ilii
II! Ill II
s s s ass s s
lip ill 11
ff?f ? i ?
,11
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
12-13
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
iiliil!
** ซ4 S rt <4 2
lilllll
? t T
f f
IH111I IIP I
s s a 3 i 1 9 3555 1
II
552533!
Pllip
11 S s a f .?
s 8
1? f f
3 1 I 1
||
II
IIIIIS
i
I I
I ! I! i 11 f
I ?1 ?
- -i 3 S
? 5 a B S
s a a ป a
R a* a K a =
^ - *ป f= >ซ
a a III I ง
ill
113
III
IS.
,11
il
Page
12-14
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume H - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
I IS11
1111 -II
i f i? s
I 1 5 s s
I ' If 11
ill
f f 5 f
H Is M M
Slss
Ills
5 I S 9
I
s ป S a ss
ll
i iiii
P (^ ป * C
M M i J *
f f S?S
2 3
S 2 % 5 S
a a ฃ R s
III
111
I? 5
S W W
552
s f
w W
ill
8 S S S 2 (5
ซ -*
1
? f f f ? ? f
III ||| i
II
II-
,11
gฃ *
"Si
i! -
i I s
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
12-15
-------
tu Ed
= ง5
5f If
I Hi
f s f ?
ill!
33
5 a:
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
I 1,1,1,1 IIS 5 f
If
32
If
I I
q
m wi
32
II? |i| ?i
S55S
,11
I
? f f
? 5
H
99
II
si
II
S
3
i!
: Kf
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
J
? 1111 f ?
S R {3 in S v S?
- -^ ซi vป i-;
I I I I I ? ?
2gงa2S
3><92.!n3
Isli
i - ij _
a g K
*ซ!-
II!
f ? f ?
u s a &
2SS2
IIII
s s fs S ฃ ?3 S S e ฃ
o o o
ฅ f ?
W fi 01
s? 5 P
m < ^
fo O
f f
I II
I ?f
.
S25S 512 2S
S2
11
s
1
1
s
1
i
I
i
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
12-17
-------
I
1
I
I
.1
2
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
1
I
8 3S5S SS5 5
1ง
, I11
I III
I f
I I-
ill
vf 88
C TJ, ฃ.-1
I II1I
cc
s
li
ฃ a S
2 a -;
ป> 2 ;
IIII
ill;
M* ?
S w m
33 "i
3 3
i II
- as
3 S 5
c s a
Ml ; T-:
* = ซ 8
3 5! S 8
* != S K
a H P
K
21
\
,11
Page
12-18
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
I
III
.13
1 I
f 5 5. f
I i Iซ |
g 2 S S
8RS5
If
II II
S g jg
I g ง
, 5 3 5 S 2 2 a
It
SP
,11
III ซ|! \l
** n S
II
5 i^
f f
IS
2 2 8
1 5225 SSS
ป 8 p
i
II
ซi p ei 5
i 1
s 3
iil
III
|
I si
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
12-19
-------
// - Food Ingestion Factors
I
g
ซ
i
^
i
1
i
i
i?
^ 2 2229?
.
1
1
V
S
i
E
0
0.
S
o
B
s
g
1
ft
* 1
2 |
Z. 1
ง
g Id (d (d Id U M
C S **!S?^ง2
ri 00ฐ -J nฐ
SU td g) cd td U
S3 " S S ft S p
1 II???
t oo lr>oo^f*)m
"* ซ V ป" V ri
fo o a a o
229??
) ฃ ป . g ซ g W ซ
** <> H - -
i --11111
(d u m m w u
ป' ซ ff! 3 m ซ
2 S S S S S
5 JSS2PS
W M U 3 U W
2 3SS2R
- *S^2roo
ซ w cS o>
I Iii i|
ซ ง s 5 II
S S S S S S
a s I a 3 3
W W (d id td Id
1 --SSagS
s 552s^^s.
ง - = as^s
| ง!งงงงง
S eo^w'J^oMin
S m r> o, ซ ป
g ?????? +
| ^s s s a s 5 g
Page
12-20
iปnun.c l\uiKS /
sill
S S 5 2
I | | f
POO Vป Vป
O >O OO
f f f f
Ilil
W M W W
-J w ^ ซ
Ilil
w u u u
S g S 2
w w 2 w
Ilil
~ ซ ป -
Ilil
- - ซ A
I i II
M Ov \O
h
S 2 1- s 1
ฐ> :
S P 1
o! ri ซ
W (d (d
| S3 S
If?
f^ *O V
III
- S 2
111
232
co eo *o
oo so o
ill
S 2 oo
2
g vo jo
o* ซ eo
III
ป 00 2
oC oi
322
s S S
n T* ci
Iff
MUM
C: S S
- c< ซ
>P T ft
O\ w
ง ง ง
S C S
g tl
Sill ,
W W W
52 S
11 f
W M M
n \o eo
II i
?? f
g i |
ป3 H H
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors /^S^O
cr"ji!Bi
.
z
t'
S
i
a
t
1
Table 12-24. I
J
^
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items ^^J?
8
I
&
i
S
g
ฃ
s
S
5
K
j
t
*l
X i
,f
1 1
ป ป *
ป ป *
* **ซ ป ซ
ป* * ป .
* * *
* * * *
ป *ซ* *
* ปปป *
* * * ป *
**
ป ** ป
* *ปป ** o
s 2352 S3 3
S3 : ^ctmot ^ s;
1. 1111 II I
, ,,,n llh ll
1
ฃ
ii
S
1
B
X
I
i
i
1 8
I fi
111!
5 i i 1
I r i
s
flw
'
3
1
ฃ
1
g
o
E
t
E
g
1
'J
2 I
-I
}{
1 II ?f i
H *(HoDl *MD1 U
f 5 ง ? 5 ?
W *H*g MM g
S 23 55 3
1 .I.| -If ?
3 2 s -a .
i .1-1 .IJ 1
1 -I-I -I! i
ง . S . M . 2 S 3
1 I I 1 1 i
3 2 ri * 2 S
I !! -p S
2 25 22 2
2 25 *22 2
8 ~* " " **
1 -S-l -II i
2 522S S2H S
f= SB-B ซSa S
I Illl Ill 1
ll
1
1
8
j
i
1 1
1 *'
* J !
] jll
Exposure Factors Handbook page
August 1996 12.21
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
I
8 I I ?? f
fl a * 3 * w w &
S 3 52 I
i
i
i
E
z
ฃ
2
ฃ
C
8
1
."!
ll
\ I -I" -if 1
5 I .ง.. .jj I
I 'I" 'I! 1
| . I. . . ** ?
1 * p. * * *~! i
1 ! -II I
ง g * S 1 ง
5 * i * * * 1 a i
I ! -II I
H *i4** * W H H
I ! -11 I
S 8^ac Q 8 2 a
rJ ri S cj -; 23ป< 5
1 =Rsa -55 s
, ,., III. |i
,
i
i
1
i
H
J
1
ti
M .ป it
Inttke dm nol profiled fcn
Nore: SB stuidnd onr
P-pocCTtikoftlMd'
Stunt: BualonEPA'iinlyii
S
i
ง
ฃ
B>
,
OM
ฃ
S
M
* i
X f
[j
H * K * K * &
f f Iff
m *Mป* d] ป g * S
*^ ป" m 2 M
1 ! i-I I
I ! M I
I ! M I
I ! M i
"
1 ! I-I I
I ! i-I I
I ! H i
H 3 * * ^ * s
1 !- 1-1 I
2 ง332 3S2 g
i iiii ui i
, ,., lib I
i
1
i
"O
I 111
5 18 8
I'M
I r 1
**aฃe Exposure Factors Handbook
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestton Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
I
ฃ
I
I
I
l
3
a s s?
OO ซHI o> o>
9 9 7 T ? +
-- rj so c* o o o
o o o -, ซ ง g
?? ??
gl ซd MM
. (d (d
od m ri
Iff
???
Ill
f f s
งU fu
00 O
M> 5-H
353
ill
ill
I'l
ป ซ
5 S 2 s
a s
S l'5
M M
aS
(d (d
ง8
s$
II
ss
?! a
ง1
S2
u 3
R S
a S?
I
i
I
o 2
li
*-
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
12-23
-------
a
I
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12- Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
*** _. i& . A 5
S 522S S32
IIII
s s
il
s
i
I i
onEPA
....
s
j>
"S3.
s
I
J
Paฃe
12~24
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
!
i
w
s
2-31. Intake of Ha
o
31
_
i
t
s
p>
ฃ
S
a.
S
0
1
* 1
1
z I
1
1
II
SS J3 *** S S! ซ ซป o *ป m
2 ง S 2 S 32l 23
ฃ on.no. iป 3 o ป.,
i -in ir i!
s
ll
llJi
งf ^H
i Islll Jill |li!
i
I
I
S3
1
m
C4
i
i
8
i
J
i
i
ti
g ซ
1 J
|||
a si f
S if 5
III ;
i
ง
E
g
2
a
ฃ
ฃ
^
,
* I
SB f
f
8 I
Eg
ป ?.
eg ... ... ..
_
. I ... ... ..
! 1
^ ** ** *
I
8 ..
f ... ... ..
I ... .....
.
g ... ... ..
H
'? ,
2 1212 SSs 23
^
111
1111
I 111
t*
1
1
i
j
i
I
i
11 i
1 1
i is ง
i li g
i ? ?
i "ฐ" *
X &
Exposure Factors Handbook pas(,
August 1996 ji 2$
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
>;
?
1
a
JS
I
I
&
X
s
1
1
3
o
1
H
8
s
a,
S
W"|
ฃ
i
ฃ
o
3
o
s
li
1!
G
.2 a
s
00000
+ + + + +
u u el ta u]
2 S g 2 5
- 0 - _ eป
8 8 S 8 S
W W W (i] ฃ
00 i _H CO <
88888
8 H ฃ I I
r-; Tf \o o o
*n t** i/> *n NO
88888
W W W M W
S ง 8 S! 8
en "I- en ซ ^
88888
w w w w w
en ot oo 5ง g
W W 3 S W
^ oo to ^ to
W ซ W S ง
ง: s 8 2 2
ซ ts cj
S g M ซ
ป a S 8 I
m oo in m vi
i I 1 1 ง
>n S cs ot S
<> rj _; pj
o o ^ o o
to o\ oo o o
< to r- eo 5
< to * ซ in
0 5Q 8 !C ง
S R S jq S
j
T ^
Ji S o '=
> 8 S 'ง> it
1 1 1 | i 5 |
S g S 1 ฃ 3 ฃ
8"~* !^( rr| ^
O O O O
W U] U U) U
en -N ^- ^f m
*o r* \o eo r^
Vl CS -H ~H CS
8 S S S 's
w w w ta u
vi t-i -< ซ
88S88
W U) W [xl [zl
8 S g 5 2
1 1 ! 1 1
S? ^ "^ tC \S
3 f 8 8 8
w w w w w
to ฐฐ o *-^ in
" Oi -* 00 ซ
ป rf rf - rf
li w uj w ui
^ r- oo cs
ซ3 00 Tf 00 K
1 1 1 i i
t^ en oo oo tr>
ซ ~+ en r4 t>i
-
*o \p o\ es o
I"* ^ O 00 CN
Tj- -, oo xd
S 1 2 ^ I
t*- ป^ en *o QI
Ot O CN VO Ov
^ O O o o
Scs rn o o
CM i u-t O
cn ^H vo vn (S
S !ซ 8 R 2
en 2 <ป ซ 2
ซ ซ ง S
1 I ซ !ป 2
1 1 1 S 5 1
r^ M O ^ * 1 C
2; 2 w > < f-
8 S 8 8 5
s s s 1 i
oo en ^f ป-< <
f f f f f
W W W U) [
S S 2 K ;
f f f f f
W W W ID t
g* JO in oo F
^H f^ ** en w
88888
U3 W Ii) W (j
~ ^ m ti 3
9 f f f f
8 s: s o vi
en i ซ .
1 H I 1 S
*"" ^ *"1 ^ "
C*< ^J IO V> >ฃ
11111
ซ in ซ ci ci
S^^ e>4 ^ G
CM O V) CN
| ^ ^ g g
o * \o oo oo o
en en c* CNI en
S S O CD S
go r* CM rr o
f* f"* *-i CN CN]
cn <** ^ i** tn
3 S S S S
lilli
g
g
OO
oo
to
Ot
i i
5 "-
ฃ o
i 1
! ซ
ซ ฃ
1 &
i ง
^
: a
s g
2 OT
Page
12-26
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food items
I
1 I?
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
|| ??n Hi
f ? ? ง ? f
IK i i i i
a ;s * S 2 S
fill
fill
ง222
iiii
^ a rt s 5
! 8 5ซ pel IS
* - ป> _i W ปi >4
-------
s 2
5
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
I
! -I
I
* 2
5 3333333 3953
II I
I I I
S3
50
223
II
I S,
33 ' 3333
S! 8 . -r
ill
I
I
JN ปM
I i
ฃ S
Page
12-28
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume H - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
Ilii- ill! -II
Bl tiu
5j a
I
m -i ซ4 M
a s 3 a i ซ
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
?f |. ff ||
ซ ^ V *4
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
a
s
a
I
I
I
II
111
232
i ^ vi
s g a g s
CO CH g g W
Si252BS
& IllI:
n
I
S
1111 f I
i iiii ill
'f S
S p
2 ง S
jt 5 5 8 j;
V ปป r- vi vl
I
3
3SS IS S2i2 IS
ssna tssi? -S Rasa g.s
II
Page
12-30
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors ^^^
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items *=^Oi
.
f
1
f
1
s-
I
S
E
I
g
3
Ai
*
ฃ
E
"
I
2 1
ป1
fi
I -> III- -II i i- i!
S f 5 f f s f ? ? ? ?
W **ป ^ M W * ^ S S ง*** S "
** *^ ซ**!*< ปซ< rim! <4m
** * **ซซ: S3 e;^ ป ป
I ! ill- -I! I I- II
g ป*ปซป 332* ป 2 u 2 gg*ป* S S
** - M 333 ซ*iซ4 S S ง ^
I i-" III- -ii I ! II
I -.I. ill- .11 I i... 11
i -!. HI. .if |. I-., if
I -! iii- -ii l i- ii
1 -! ill- -ii i i--- 11
i B3SSS33 5222 8-23 S3 522S 22
. --.,.ป. ซ8ซ= , . ,.,.. .
1 -liiiii ill! ill ง 1111 If
H*
j
I
i
^ i
111
kitซkปditปnotproปModfbrซ
NOTE: Seซซtandacdซrof
P'pemmtilaofttwd
Soum: BaMd on EPA'ซ analy
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1996 j2-3i
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
N
_ซn4.
I ? f ? ? ? ? ? ? ??
s r s-g- -is 'I IT Ii
I I- i-|. -y .; j.|. ||
s i ? f ? f งงง ง
S I* IT -85 *! 1*1* 1
ฃ i I. I.I. .11 .1 1.1. i
i
f
* i r rs* 'i! '9 rr 9
s i i- i*i* ii -i ง! ?-
g ซ a 83 23 333 33
s
^ s a s a s
d
I
s _s s งi ง
s* *งg S SS Ss
S i .....S. 1*1* !ง
5 SSSISSi SSaง 221 12 SSSi SS
a ซ-ซซa?a SSRS -ซ*ป -a R = ซซ s s
I 1111 ill il ilii Ii
itw
whD
***
H**
Val
8
i
Page
12-32
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
x
s
1
S f f
i
5
r= oi ซ: 5 rf 2
5?
il
o> f*
f Iff? 3?
3 s g งss = s stag
*ซปซ- ot**^ nj iTi i3i
I
II -I ii
S3
,11
III
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996 -
Page
12-33
"\
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
iiiiii
H
S3S
If If If
& S S
SS S
)P C **
5 a 3
ง K S H S
III!
5lB SS5
ill iซ
8 ป 5 a a
s
3
a a 2
ill
O) *. ^
II
ง 2 i! 3 S 5 ง 2 S S s s 3 S 2
5 = 5 9 K S S R 8 ง e = R ง S
I Isllsgc 1111 ?ll
.1
j
I III
11
22S
3S55
ซ= SsSs SS
1
1
Page
12-34
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors x^SkQ
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items s=%_r-J1
^
?
I
t
5
i
SB
5
2
H
!
1
1
ฃ
$
Ai
2
s
o
s
s
g
;
*
c
7.
Z '
* ...1'. . . * . * ' . * * * I ^ II
* ....I?. ..1 .11 .1 IIP If
| ?|B _ | .If , | ||H ||
3, 25 S 12 2335252
| g?. _ | . f g .1 |||| ||
3 32 5 ง2 ง2SSฐ2S
I !! ! -11 -I IIII II
_
1 !! *! -11 *1 ill! ii
1 ----I!- ! -II ! IIII II
l . . . . j j . . . j . S ! .1 3 1 1 i If
g ^r: ^ 2^ 33.42*5!
i ii- --I -ii -I ilil 11
I ii- --i -ii ! ill! 11
I ""11 -I -11 -1 iill II
2 S222SS5 5S51 5S5 S2 ESSS 11
5 ...SS839 SS^o -3R ซg ^RX^ 38
I 111ฐ III 11 IIII II
Hi
1 IJI
.
1
JS
i
1 8
1 jซ
i {i i
ill6
^ ii I
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1996 12-35
-------
xga^j^ Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
-, , , Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
I
1
J
1
3
I
2
I
I
E
2
S
2
*
=
l
* s
*!
-1
ii
Eป w g ฃ W Kl 4UJE * S K "^ H E M
I 11- -III !! -I i-!I II
i ? f fff งf ffffff
M ....as. . S A ฃ a 5 .3 S . S S s ฃ
! II- -III -1! -I i-ii 11
| . . . . 1 1 . 'alg *|g '1 I'll ll
I ll -III -II -I I-II II
I II- -III -II -I I-II II
I II- -lil -II -I I-II II
I II- -Hi -II -i Hi li
I ll -III -II -I !-H li
i ....||. .|i| -ii .| m ii
S * * S ฃJ * W (g **S ป bl U ฃ 2 ป W 3 ง ^
2 ง3S15BS 5S2g SSI S3 2S5S li
S -,r, = zS9- -SSS .SR .S R-5S S7
1 il|llli "" l|i งl !
ill
.Bed
i |*ซ
, ,iปni> Mllil.i ,11 fllii }.]
j
i
i
s a
i Jf
J ]||
ij s
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
12-36 August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
"I
ill!
8 2 $ s
*< > 5 ri
'i
II
I
i.
9-
II-
ii
s. s
tn n
Ii
ซ S Si
ill
si I
If?
5 2 3 S
i III
5 Iff
a I s g
111
5SS IS
S3S' 1
2^2
lง
og K8Ca R
I
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
12-37
-------
I
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
II
S3
35
f S
f
1 .
!ง .
SS
saa
ESS
i s!!isin jii
1
II -I !!
! -
I
ssg ss asss as
PS
*
ll
jii fi
6
Page
12-38
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
a
f
il
ill
!!! !!! -II ! H
-
1
.
,IJi!tJj
jll f
ii
i ง
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
12-39
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
1
1
1
ง
s
i
H
s
B.
1
ฃ
S
ฃ
s
5)
K
5?
ฃ
u
&9
S
1
g
*1
x f
-i
!i
,
I ? i ?
2 2 * IT
I f -r
s 2 la'
I s . .11.
5 S Sri
1 sis
5 S 89"
- - --
9.
I
s i L-
i III
S 5 * งg*
1 IS?
1 5 81"
i ง II
s 52s
I S s s
a i ง1*
1 i i 2 S 1 S ง 3393
8 ซซsซ-*S\ซ > 5 5? *ฐ
i ^iiiiil ll|i
ป
s (:ปiiit i.ill 1
* R = * ^ * ^ * ^ *
.UU .HI . ฃ. U .
23 5 3 3
3 f f 3 f
. a is .a i s . g.
s 2 2 S 1
II -I i- i-
.....
'".'. '*.- ' !' i-
* le S * S * W* B *
J, J , ,
si -s * I* 9-
11 -1 1ซ i-
f S f f 8
rag * ฃ> * @* ง *
88 8 99
*UU * O * ฃ2 * R *
R | 1 |ซ |
2Sง 11 2 22 25
ปss as t-sซ> ps
ill 1| 1 11 ii
HB
iii
'Ii u ii
1.1 ^1 fi.n i..
s
8
j
1
1
1
1 g
I
I g |
all
ป .1 1
o &ฃ ง
g g-5 |
i "
i e i
S6 M
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
12-40 August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
:;;:: g;u
<* m M -i _i
? a s ^
393
;s g a s s
S33S
'? f f ? f ? ? ??
tug M BJ i i w tdui
S S S S S
5
232
"1.2
II
11
oi 2
i1!
I s;
I
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
12-41
-------
/jjjtff^^j Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
...... Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
1
a
*H
1
I
1
1
i
eC
et
i
H
ฃ
2
1
E
$
ฃ
0
&
SC
g
1
*
* 1
2 I
56 1
|
11
? f ? f f ff f? ง
bl * U w tdปu i++ f + +
5 55 5s * 33 "g a ' * * "1 *
f If ff ff fig
~ ****ฃ* * K * g * " & * W . . . ' ฃ *
2 .S3 ^2 ?5^ f5fi ?i
** *4 ซ<4 .4^ ซ4c4 H
f ff - ' ?- f f '
ง is- -i-l *ii ^1 s*" r
f s ^ ? f f? fง ง
g * " * * 5 ง * * s * S * a " 5 K ง
"" ป - 3 ซ -i 3 ^
| ||. .|.| .f| .| |._ ^
S- 12. a .. S
S S3 S ^ ^^ 5^ ?
3S sง 5
* Ss S5?5??-"
g * * * K S *W*S * * ฃ2 K * * * w *
a" -Sa2a_
I ....If. ' .5.S .Is .1 |... |.
2 S2 S2 S3 SS 2
s ? -
I . . . . IS. . 1. 1 . II . 1 p. . . .
1 ....p. .|.| .I| | I 9
i sS* * I* 1 * Is "1 1" * * !"
1 ISI ^1 lงg ^ 1 ซ _ 1^
3 55 5S 2S *3 I*'* S*
i ซ . . . ^ s . ,|.g *ii * ^ i*** i*
i gi2Sง2ง g|ง| |2g 22 2gง2 ^
X ซ ซ 2 ซ s s - aaaa SR? a ssas 32
1 ง 1 1 1 1 ง 1 ill! ง11 11 1111 11
8 ' " 1 * S S S 1111 lip *| Isll งS
1 1 a
i s I
.ป ซ ซ
ง} *U
H ^ w 3 eS o2 M
g
1
i
i
i
1
!|
f i
1 ^
i J !
i ^ i
1 11 1
I'M
I a* i
fi i
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
12-42 August 1996
-------
Volume It - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12- Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
? f
-
-
ง ?
3 5151125
1
III .!!.
III
H
II
--Ml! .ill
'II
*
a s s 9
*ii
s s
IS
'
.
135
i
aas -a Pป>RS
5223 Sง
ditt not provided lbc
SE-andudanr
P-perajil3ซofthซd
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
12-43
-------
^^^ Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
7~'--~p Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
I
1
1
s
\
r<
i
ง
ป
ซ
I
ฃ
2
E
E
ฃ
E
1
M
ซF i
(
SK i
*
1
! --II- -I-! -II -1 M-tl
ง 11 11 ? 1 ^ 1 . . ^ ? ^
I if ff ff fffff
M U^* *g*g gp] *ง &**ซ S@
i if if ง ? ง ง f ? f
| || . .. | . | . || . | | . . | g g
I ....is. 'i-| *li *| g s i?
I -ป -i-I -i! ! !-! II
| |g. .|.| .|| .j |..| ||
i II- -i'l -ii *i i"i 11
i II- -i-i -il -I .i--i ii
I 1|. . | . j . || . i s..| ||
S . . . . ง p . i I ' - I * 1 "..(,; |u
1 22ง2งls iฃ2g 5SS . 9S 5382 ' 38
X .^S.RRS =*ฃซ =5K -^ Rซ = R 8K
||i
, 5liiyU Jrlll ll.J ,11 fllll H.
,
1
i
i
i
i
111
I ฃi 1
Ml
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
12-44 August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
f
1 5 I I I S 1 f. I .If, - 1 1.11 11
S 8 H
Iff SI
! I ? 11 sin
' K H
g
S
S 3 ? f
Q _
' I 1
2 'ป "*'
3 ? 3 M
g a g $ s
3 2 S 2 I
SS 9
ง ป. ^ a a R s ป
I
SSS
ags si R = S a
II
,s 1 i S a I P
1
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
12-45
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
s
HlS
--
' s* 2 e
* <4 ซ4
? ? ?
a i i
? f
2 r^
?
II
g -. ซ a 2 ? B a s s 3 R sac *S
jii
??f f?
-
-
Ill
53S 25 Sags
s P a
I
Jl
attx
onEPA
Page
12-46
Exposure Factors Handbook
Aซgusf /99(?
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
*
?f
O (4 Bl
11!" "1*8
f I?
H> g) M
a R s a
a 5 a I
=*ง
SSiSS
ff
:i!
Iff
*2
f??
I'll
??? ?
ff ff
2'
si
8 S
122 IS 5393
3->R8 งS
n
*
ฐ
-------
^S^^ Volume II - Food Ingestton Factors
^~^-~^ Chapter 12 -
|:
1
|
1
|
1
J
2
ฃ
8
ฃ
1
ฃ
2
g
2
ฃ
2
c
_
S
1
i
* 1
x 1
-i
1
11
i 11*
g * * S K * F-
** w ซซ ปปk
? f f f
g .... 1 1 . . |
ซ V S 3
1 If. 1
g 23s
| If. ง
3 -S 2
1 11" 1
g .... gj.g . ^
I .... 11- I
2 S 5 3
| l.j. ง
3 la 3
1 |j. ง
5- 3
| ||. 1
2 25
(*> ...*gg. p
2 j * _:
| ' ' ' * If' |
S 2I2I1S2 3
I .-asas!- n
I mini i
8" = aRS +
I 5=JiSS
Page
12-48
Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
1. 1 .11 .. | I...J1
*o ^ v%^f , <4 *t ^ rl
| ? | ? ? ? f ?
^ * S * f S * si 1 * != s
vi ซf 3 ซi ซi ri ซ> 3
S f ff f f ??
H ' H * (U til * @ W W W
srt * 9 3 33
|.f ,.|| ,| |.||
* ง s 5 3 5 ,-
|.| ,|| ,J |.I|
|.| .|| .| |.||
|.| . || .| j. II
" " "3 3 *'""
i . s . 1 1 .1 i . i 5
s 3 *3 3 5 s5
j.j .g| .1 |. ||
S. S 3 .-
i-l -ii i Mi
S S _3 ^ 5^
|. S . || .g |. 5S
HH S3 2 -i3S
M o W U cd *E9 Cd*Wf)
512 399 IS 2iงS
s = R - s 5 -S 5 ' ซ n
in in ii mi
i'li
in i .11
'P P
32
If
**
W DI
ss
II
ii
ii
11
II
*
23
V ri
ii
ii
S-
ii
2 ^
!i
sa
s s
H
1
.6 S
III
!||
ill
1
S
8
|
J
i
i
ง S
*E r^
i ! 1
s I's
8 >s 5
l ! 1
1 s8- a
-9 ii M
111
2 0
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors /4ttjtf^
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items ^=x^
^
i
j
i
1
8
1
S
I
ฃ
i
ฃ
=
E
z
t
*
c
z
z '
L
f f? f ?ff s f f f
w * g g * u ป * tti g u *g S * * S g *
f ....?|. I... |?5 .1 ?..l i.
? .... 11. ง. . . s?? .1 1. . 1 1.
J ....II. 1... III. .1 I..J J.
1 ...,lj. j... ill .1 I..I 1-
1 11 ! 11! -1 i-i !
S ....S3. S . . . ง 1 g s i 1 1*
I II- ! !!! -i. I--I 1-
i ....||. |... in .| |..| |.
K * * * * S S * K * * ^ En ^ * W K * * S 6^ *
I 11- ! Ill -I 1--1 !
I II- ! I!! -I i--I I-
ง S S 5 2 B ง 3 ill 2 SSg s2 Blง2 Si
6 -"osssa $ปsa ssa -s s-sa^ as
|| g
111
!ง{ -Si
1 t"""* |Sl!l 'lJ Ilf |ll!l ^
I
i
j
i
i S
111
5 11 8
ฃ ซ & -a
| ^ 1
h i
Exposure Factors Handbook Page
August 1996 12-49
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
I
inn mi m
f ?f I If
mill iiii -;: \\ mi
f. 1 S 11 II
? f
II
2 s
232
i p
i Q
I g M W
i 1 S ^
T f
i H S 53
iiii
S S lei
s 3
8 S 3 3 3
& Eg la ta Ed i
8 2 5 3 i
SSaa
f 1
ill
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
f
Iff
* n) caj crt
2 5 S
88
1 '5*8 T,
?f
SI
.1.1
sis
523
? f f ?
S P
r4 *4
II;
a c
i 1 1
2 M ^
S 3
1SS 13 SSSi S2
aSR
,11
I
I .J
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
12-51
-------
I
I
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
? f ? ? ff? ? ?
sill ill li
?? fff I f
I f
11 II
s ^ S
if? f f
( m *n ซ**ซ *4
III!
2s 5 *ll
SS
SI
K s q
ซ4 *rt
t; | R ^ ? P. 55
M 2 *^ "* * ^ 2
? a a s s E ง a
1
I Q Q
o 9 9
O
ป
55
RES
,11
,!liงIU !ป
li ง
72-52
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
ffff ?fff ? i
3 S ง g 888$ i||
ซ
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
I
3
ซi Z3 W m 3 V
lip
M & g |g fS t|
S 5 3 3 P 5
I s s a
i 1 ป 111 i
tf r-ฃ ^ ซ4 .* ! M
f ffffงf
U M^UHHUS
2*8825=
5S5
III
?ง f
ill
12SS 32S
f |?f
ซf) "(J -ซ
I 111
I 111
P P S BI
.! I!!
3 3 Si <3 .
.1
2
ijij
I
ง
ts ซ
; s
13
,11
I
ill
I S1
Page
12-54
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors /^^^
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items ^^_~7
1
.3
|
1
i
8
2
I
ฃ
s
ป
ซ
s
i
i
*
z
JB '
1
? f ? ? ?
P) M g [5 tjj
I ..Jill
! -mi
i HH
i ***งฃงง!
f: cซ * 2 t-;
f f ? ??
I * " sill
i -mi
i -mi
1 -III!
I Hi!
2
1 ' * * i I i -
i 21S2SIS
t ซป
I mini
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
ill H -1 Hi i-
Si! H *i Hi ง
. 1 S | 1 ' " *I I*II -
^OMei oซ ป* ปi ^M-* ^
ii? || | i. 5 i 5.
??? ? 5 ? ?ff f
MUM fi5*U W U*B1U PJ
S B S 23 " g . g ^ SJX ง
f?5 ?f f 5 ? f f
. ฃ u w w . w . u u.uu u .
H?!3 5^ 3 2^* 3
ซซ*4 m*4 w ซซ- w
II! M -I Mi !
Ill M -1 I-1I I-
III M -I Ml I-
-HI |.| .| in |.
i!i l-i ! H! I-
i!SS 232 งS SSsS Si
2 ป*t If |i 5? 2 3 S 3 *ป ? P 2-5
IHI US 1! Illl H
Hi
j |||
s
1
1
i
1
1 1
j i j
1 A 1
Page
12-55
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
ง
o n *!
I IIII II
I llliill
1 aSSSSSl
ii i in
1111
II
ง1 ? ง
i I | -
:! 111!
88 f ? ? ง
lilllii
5 S s 1 a 3
is III
iiilli I
ssaa
f ? fI?f I
Illllll
lilisls
1111 111
5 2s 5 3 = 2
55
a.งง
งE
s s s i H
,11
S S = 2
i - ซ
Page
12-56
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
'! 1 f,! f,! 11
K 3
<4 ri
III!
ass
IIS
,1111
f if.
f ? ?
11 s
Is
2 2 P R ซs s
2 w w 3 3
SSS2S
332
??
il
liiii
S3 5:
1
I
M 2
W W W Ui
552
ill it
1! Ill
2 w u 2 a
HI
552
1583 231
23 = 2 * ป i
2 5
|g
IS
,11
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
12-57
-------
3
I
1
Volume H - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
iiiili
i ง
ll
? ?
li
ง in
S 5 2
* ซn iปi
ง f
-------
Volume H - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
1111:
S 5 2 3
a 5 a 2
* n t4 H
s 8 = a R
s I* 6 si
S3 ง 2
wi ft *4
Iff?
-4 2 r*
^ S 5 ง 3 2 ง S 5 B 2
ocxK&is a S S s
? ? ??
fi "
ฃ in
Zi n
SS1S si
515
if
55
t4
5 S S =
,11
111
55 # f*
s
I
!
i
s
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
12-59
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
1111 1111
35 S 2 S 3 3
8 f S 8 8 g 8
I i i i S | I
2 S 2 S 2 ง S :
I i 1I i
P 3 3 2 S
3 2 2!
335
iili
31
I ...II
III
s
3
I
S
521
* H *
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
1 I
?5? ?
8813
I
iiiii
Iff
f liililf
aa
5 s a s
111 la S3
iiiilii
4*{ ซ4 S Q! S CM 3
S S2
? 5 5
S tu M
5 5 5
III ii Ifii II
||| ||| || |lj|l ||
111
f f f
SS8S
HI |
Sf
;B5 3
jl
Ilil
S2S3
2 2
Si
I
I
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
12-61
-------
^ft^^\ Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
TซiU 12-ซ9. Intikt of Homegrown Cftnii (g/kt
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
fill!
ซ m ซrt i
i -iiiiii
s. 3 3 E a
M iSK 5 o;
I- 2S83t*$= SS1S Sg
a llsigjl Issl g=
s is
SPSS
,11
3 2
+ 9 '
P 13
i
i
i li
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
12-63
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
11
1!
ii ii ii
ISU ill II I
ii
III II fill ! S
Sงฐง ง3
* o 00.
ii
i39
i ง i
III 111 !! 193! ง
III!
Ii
ill
II Iiii
8 S
งa ** a
is!
111! II! 11 !=!! I I
l!
. -1S a
Illll
sill
Page
12-64
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors x-^O
'ilJrWS
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items ^!\^J'
I
a
.9
i
I
g
J
31
31
if
t _
M
! J
1
5 S 3 ง 3 $ S3 ฃ 5= a 3 R 3 3 S
o a. 0 o
-------
-^a^^> Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
I
A
I
1
j
H
1
'
IbuBani
1
1
i
1
I
^
i
1
i iiii ill , i! iiii '35
i iiii ill ii is!! Ii
i งI = ง II! ii iiii i!
i iiii iii II iiii II
! Us- il! 11 sin |i
I !!!! 11! II ii!!' ii
i iiii III ii iiii ! =
I Iiii iii II iiii ii
i III! 1!! i! iiii 19
i ii-i I!! i! slii งง
a 1 a
|tl
Page Exposure Factors Handbook
12-66 August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors xihO
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items ^*^s
f
I
.9
I
j
ฃ
f"
H
;
i
i
i
I
1
1
I Hi! III II 8333 3i
I 3333 33.3. II 3383 33
i 83S3 III II mi |i
1 S8a'5 !lง S3 . 333! S
I II'II I!! !! fill 35
i iปi in ii ins 11
i iiii m ii iiii :,
1 3333 .333 II 111! II
3 3333 III I! mi |s
5 3333 111 1| |is| y
I 3338 III !! mi ง3
, fliiii
A Jjijj
|
1
1
1
Exposure Factors Handbook page
August 1996 I2 S6?
-------
Volume II - Food Jngestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
Table 12-72. Confidence in Homegrown Food Consumption Recommendations
Considerations
Rationale
Rating
Study Elements
Level of Peer Review
Accessibility
Reproducibility
Focus on factor of interest
* Data pertinent to U.S.
Primary dmU
Currency
Adequacy of data
collection period
Validity of approach
Study size
Representativeness of the
population
Bias in study design (high
rating desirable)
Measurement Error
(high rating desirable)
Other Elements
Number of studies
Agreement between
researchers
Overall Rating
USDA and EPA review
Methods described in detail in Handbook
see above
Yes
U.S. population
Yes
1987/88
Statistical method used to estimate long-
term distribution from one-week survey
data.
Individual intakes inferred from household
consumption.
10,000 individuals, 4500 households
Nationwide survey representative of
general U.S. population
Non-response bias can not be ruled out due
to low response rate.
Individuals' estimates of food weights
imprecise
1
N/A
Highest confidence in means, lowest
confidence in long term percentiles
High
High
High
High
High
High
Medium
High (Means & Short-term distributions)
Low (Long-term distributions)
Medium (Means)
Low (Distributions)
High
High
Medium
Medium
Low
Medium (Means)
Medium
(Short-term distributions)
Low (Long-term
distributions)
Page
J2-68
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
APPENDIX 12A
Food Codes and Definitions Used in Analysis
of the 1987/88 USDA NFCS Data
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
12A-1
-------
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Ra^fojrVariom Home ProducedFood Items
Appendix 12A. Pood Codes and Definitions Used in Analysis of Ihc 1987/88 USDA NFCS Data
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
MAJOR FOOD GROUPS
Total Fruits
50- Fresh Fruits
citrus
other vitamin-C rich
other fruits
512- Commercially Canned Fruits
522- Commercially Frozen Fruits
533- Canned Fruit Juice
534- Frozen Fruit Juice
535- Aseptically Packed Fruit Juice
536- Fresh Fruit Juice
542- Dried Fruits
(includes baby foods)
6- Fruits
citrus fruits and juices
dried fruits
other fruits
fruits/juices & nectar
fruit/juices baby food
(includes baby foods)
Total
Vegetables
48- Potatoes, Sweetpotatoes
49- Fresh Vegetables
dark green
deep yellow
tomatoes
light green
other
511- Commercially Canned Vegetables
521 - Commercially Frozen Vegetables
531- Canned Vegetable Juice
532- Frozen Vegetable Juice
537- Fresh Vegetable Juice
538- Aseptically Packed Vegetable Juice
541- Dried Vegetables
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures/dinners)
7- Vegetables (all forms)
white potatoes & PR starchy
dark green vegetables
deep yellow vegetables
tomatoes and torn, mixtures
other vegetables
veg. and mixtures/baby food
veg. with meat mixtures
(includes baby foods: mixtures, mostly vegetables)
Total Meats
44- Meat
beef
pork
veal
lamb
mutton
goat
game
lunch meat
mixtures
451- Poultry
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
20- Meat, type not specified
21- Beef
22- Pork
23- Lamb, veal, game, carcass meat
24- Poultry
25- Organ meats, sausages, lunchmeats, meat spreads
(excludes meat, poultry, and fish with non-meat items; frozen
plate meals; soups and gravies with meat, poultry and fish
base; and gelatin-based drinks; includes baby foods)
Total Dairy
40- Milk Equivalent
fresh fluid milk
processed milk
cream and cream substitutes
frozen desserts with milk
cheese
dairy-based dips
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
1- Milk and Milk Products
milk and milk drinks
cream and cream substitutes
milk desserts, sauces, and gravies
cheeses
(includes regular fluid milk, human milk, imitation milk
products, yogurt, milk-based meal replacements, and infant
formulas)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996 _____
Page
12A-3
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - IntakeJRatesJor Various Home Produced Food Items
Appendix 12A. Food Codes and Defihitinos Used in Analysis of the 1987/88 USDA NFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
Total Fish
452- Fish. Shellfish
various species
fresh, frozen, commercial, dried
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners)
26- Fish, Shellfish
various species and forms
(excludes meat, poultry, and fish with non-meat items; frozen
plate meals; soups and gravies with meat, poultry and fish
base; and gelatin-based drinks)
INDIVIDUAL FOODS
While
Potatoes
4811 - White Potatoes, fresh
4821 - White Potatoes, commercially canned
4831 - White Potatoes, commercially frozen
4841- White Potatoes, dehydrated
4851 - White Potatoes, chips, sticks, salad
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
lo-eat dinners)
71 - White Potatoes and PR Starchy Veg.
baked, boiled, chips, sticks, creamed, scalloped, au
gratin, fried, mashed, stuffed, puffs, salad, recipes,
soups, Puerto Rican starchy vegetables
(does not include vegetables soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
Peppers
4913- Green/Red Peppers, fresh
5111201 Sweet Green Peppers, commercially canned
5111202 Hot Chili Peppers, commercially canned
5211301 Sweet Green Peppers, commercially frozen
5211302 Green Chili Peppers, commercially frozen
5211303 Red Chili Peppers, commercially frozen
5413112 Sweet Green Peppers, dry
5413113 Red Chili Peppers, dry
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners)
7512100 Pepper, hot chili, raw
7512200 Pepper, raw
7512210 Pepper, sweet green, raw
7512220 Pepper, sweet red, raw
7522600 Pepper, green, cooked, NS as to fat added
7522601 Pepper, green, cooked, fat not added
7522602 Pepper, green, cooked, fat added
7522604 Pepper, red, cooked, NS as to fat added
7522605 Pepper, red, cooked, fat not added
7522606 Pepper, red, cooked, fat added
7522609 Pepper, hot, cooked, NS as to fat added
7522610 Pepper, hot, cooked, fat not added
7522611 Pepper, hot, cooked, fat added
7551101 Peppers, hot, sauce
7551102 Peppers, pickled
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
Onions
4953- Onions, Garlic, fresh
onions
chives
garlic
leeks
5114908 Garlic Pulp, raw
5114915 Onions, commercially canned
5213722 Onions, commercially frozen
5213723 Onions with Sauce, commercially frozen
5413103 Chives, dried
5413105 Garlic Flakes, dried
5413110 Onion Flakes, dried
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners)
7510950 Chives, raw
7511150 Garlic, raw
7511250 Leek, raw
7511701 Onions, young green, raw
7511702 Onions, mature
7521550 Chives, dried
7521740 Garlic, cooked
7522100 Onions, mature cooked, NS as to fat added
7522101 Onions, mature cooked, fat not added
7522102 Onions, mature cooked, fat added
7522103 Onions, pearl cooked
7522104 Onions, young green cooked, NS as to fat
7522105 Onions, young green cooked, fat not added
7522106 Onions, young green cooked, fat added
7522110 Onion, dehydrated
7541501 Onions, creamed
7541502 Onion rings
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meal mixtures)
Page
12A-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
Appendix 12A. Food Codes and Definitins Used in Analysis of the 1987/88 USDA NFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Codle/Deflnition
Individual Code
Corn
4956- Corn, fresh
5114601 Yellow Corn, commercially canned
5114602 White Cora, commercially canned
5114603 Yellow Creamed Corn, commercially canned
5 P14604 White Creamed Com, commercially canned
5114605 Corn on Cob, commercially canned
5114607 Hominy, canned
5115306 Low Sodium Corn, commercially canned
5115307 Low Sodium Cr. Com, commercially canned
5213501 Yellow Com on Cob, commercially frozen
5213502 Yellow Corn off Cob, commercially frozen
5213503 Yell. Com with Sauce, commercially frozen
5213504 Com with other Veg., commercially frozen
5213505 White Com on Cob, commercially frozen
5213506 White Corn off Cob, commercially frozen
5213507 Wh. Com with Sauce, commercially frozen
5413104 Com, dried
5413106 Hominy, dry
5413603 Corn, instant baby food
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
lo-eat dinners: includes baby food)
7510960 Corn, raw
7521600 Corn, cooked, NS as to color/fat added
7521601 Com, cooked, NS as to color/fat not added
7521602 Corn, cooked, NS as to color/fat added
7521605 Com, cooked, NS as to color/cream style
7521607 Corn, cooked, dried
7521610 Com, cooked, yellow/NS as to fat added
7521611 Com, cooked, yellow/fat not added
7521612 Com, cooked, yellow/fat added
7521615 Corn, yellow, cream style
7521616 Com, cooked, yell. & whVNS as to fat
7521617 Corn, cooked, yell. & wlWfat not added
7521618 Corn, cooked, yell. & wh./fat added
7521619 Com, yellow, cream style, fat added
7521620 Corn, cooked, white/NS as to fat added
7521621 Corn, cooked, white/fat not added
7521622 Corn, cooked, white/fat added
7521625 Com, white, cream style
7521630 Corn, yellow, canned, low sodium. NS fat
7521631 Corn, yell., canned, low sod., fat not add
7521632 Corn. yell., canned, low sod., fat added
7521749 Hominy, cooked
752175- Hominy, cooked
7541101 Corn scalloped or pudding
7541102 Com fritter
7541103 Com with cream sauce
7550101 Corn relish
76405- Corn, baby
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures: includes babv food)'
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
I2A-S
-------
Volume 11 - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
Appendix 12A. Food Codes and Definitinos Used in Analysis of the 1987/88 USDA NFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
Apples
5031- Apples, fresh
5122101 Applesauce with sugar, commercially canned
SI22102 Applesauce without sugar, comm. canned
5122103 Apple Pie Filling, commercially canned
5122104 Apples, Applesauce, baby/jr., comm. canned
5122106 Apple Pie Filling, Low Cal., comm. canned
5223101 Apple Slices, commercially frozen
5332101 Apple Juice, canned
5332102 Apple Juice, baby, Comm. canned
5342201 Apple Juice, comm. frozen
5342202 Apple Juice, home frozen
5352101 Apple Juice, aseptically packed
5362101 Apple Juice, fresh
5423101 Apples, dried
(includes baby food; except mixtures)
6210110 Apples, dried, uncooked
6210115 Apples, dried, uncooked, low sodium
6210120 Apples, dried, cooked, NS as to sweetener
6210122 Apples, dried, cooked, unsweetened
6210123 Apples, dried, cooked, with sugar
6310100 Apples, raw
6310111 Applesauce, NS as to sweetener
6310112 Applesauce, unsweetened
6310113 Applesauce with sugar
6310114 Applesauce with low calorie sweetener
6310121 Apples, cooked or canned with syrup
6310131 Apple, baked NS as to sweetener
6310132 Apple, baked, unsweetened
6310133 Apple, baked with sugar
6310141 Apple rings, fried
6310142 Apple, pickled
6310150 Apple, fried
6340101 Apple, salad
6340106 Apple, candied
6410101 Apple cider
6410401 Apple juice
6410405 Apple juice with vitamin C
6710200 Applesauce baby fd., NS as to str. or jr.
6710201 Applesauce baby food, strained
6710202 Applesauce baby food, junior
6720200 Apple juice, baby food
(includes baby food: except mixtures)
Tomatoes
4931- Tomatoes, fresh
5113- Tomatoes, commercially canned
5115201 Tomatoes, low sodium, commercially canned
5115202 Tomato Sauce, low sodium, comm. canned
5115203 Tomato Paste, low sodium, comm. canned
5115204 Tomato Puree. low sodium, comm. canned
5311 - Canned Tomato Juice and Tomato Mixtures
5321 - Frozen Tomato Juice
5371 - Fresh Tomato Juice
5381102 Tomato Juice, aseptically packed
5413115Tomatoes,dry
5614- Tomato Soup
5624- Condensed Tomato Soup
5654- Dry Tomato Soup
(does not include mixtures, and readv-to-eat dinners)
74- Tomatoes and Tomato Mixtures
raw, cooked, juices, sauces, mixtures, soups,
sandwiches
Page
12A-6
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestioh Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
Appendix 12A. Food Codes and Dclinitins Used in Analysis of the 1987/88 USDA NFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
Snap Beans
4943- Snap or Wax Beans, fresh
5114401 Green or Snap Beans, commercially canned
5114402 Wax or Yellow Beans, commercially canned
5114403 Beans, baby/jr., commercially canned
5115302 Green Beans, low sodium, comm. canned
5115303 Yell, or Wax Beans, tow sod., comm. canned
5213301 Snap or Green Beans, comm. frozen
5213302 Snap or Green w/sauce, comm. frozen
5213303 Snap or Green Beans w/other veg., comm. fr.
5213304 Sp. or Gr. Beans w/other vegJsc.. comm. fr.
5213305 Wax or Yell. Beans, comm. frozen
(does not include soups, mixtures, and ready-to-eat dinners;
includes baby foods)
7510180 Beans, string, green, raw
7520498 Beans, string, cooked, NS color/fat added
7520499 Beans, string, cooked, NS color/no fat
7520500 Beans, string, cooked, NS color & fat
7520501 Beans, string, cooked, green/NS fat
7520502 Beans, string, cooked, green/no fat
7520503 Beans, string, cooked, green/fat
7520511 Beans, str., canned, low sod.,green/NS fat
7520512 Beans, str., canned, Ipw sod.,green/no fat
7520513 Beans, str., canned, low sod.,green/fat
7520600 Beans, string, cooked, yellow/NS fat
7520601 Beans, string, cooked, yellow/no fat
7520602 Beans, string, cooked, yellow/fat
7540301 Beans, string, green, creamed
7540302 Beans, string, green, w/mushroom sauce
7540401 Beans, string, yellow, creamed
7550011 Beans, string, green, pickled
7640100 Beans, green, string, baby
7640101 Beans, green, string, baby, str.
7640102 Beans, green, string, baby, junior
7640103 Beans, green, string, baby, creamed
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures: includes baby foods)
Beef
441- Beef
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
21- Beef
beef, nfs
beefsteak
beef oxtails, neckbones, ribs
roasts, stew meat, corned, brisket, sandwich steaks
ground beef, patties, meatballs
other beef items
beef baby food
(excludes meat, poultry, and fish with non-meat items; frozen
plate meals; soups and gravies with meat, poultry and fish
base: and gelatin-based drinks; includes baby food)
Pork
442- Pork
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
22- Pork
pork, nfs; ground dehydrated
chops
steaks, cutlets
ham
roasts
Canadian bacon
bacon, salt pork
other pork items
pork baby food
(excludes meat, poultry, and fish with non-meat items; fro/en
plate meals; soups and gravies with meat, poultry and fish
base; and gelatin-based drinks; includes babv food)
Game
445- Variety Meat, Game
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
233- Game
(excludes meat, poultry, and fish with non-meat items; frozen
plate meals; soups and gravies with meat, poultry and fish
base: and gelatin-based drinks)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996 '
Page
12A-7
-------
Volume //'.- Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
Appendix 12 A. Food Codes and Definitinos Used in Analysis of the 1987/88 USDA NFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
Poultry
451-Poultry
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners: includes baby foods except mixtures)
24- Poultry
chicken
turkey
duck
other poultry
poultry baby food
(excludes meat, poultry, and fish with non-meat items; frozen
plate meals; soups and gravies with meat, poultry and fish
base: and gelatin-based drinks; includes baby food)
Eggs
46- Eggs (fresh equivalent)
fresh
processed eggs, substitutes
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
3- Eggs
eggs
egg mixtures
egg substitutes
eggs baby food
froz. meals with egg as main ingred.
(includes baby foods)
Broccoli
4912- Fresh Broccoli (and home canned/froz.)
5111203 Broccoli, comm canned
52112- Coniin. Fro/en Broccoli
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners: includes baby foods except mixtures)
722- Broccoli (all forms)
(dews not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with incut mixtures)
Carrots
4921- Fresh Carrots (and home canned/froz.)
51121 - Comm. Canned Carrots
5115101 Carrots, Low Sodium, Comm. Canned
52121- Cornm. Frozen Carrots
5312103 Comm. Canned Carrot Juice
5372102 Carrot Juice Fresh
5413502 Carrots, Dried Baby Food
(docs not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners: includes baby foods except mixtures)
7310- Carrots (all forms)
7311140 Carrots in Sauce
7311200 Carrot Chips
76201- Carrots, baby
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures; includes baby foods except
mixtures)
Pumpkin
4922- Fresh Pumpkin, Winter Squash (and home
canned/froz.)
51122- Pumpkin/Squash, Baby or Junior, Comm. Canned
52122- Winter Squash. Comm. Frozen
5413504 Squash, Dried Baby Food
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
lo-cal dinners: includes hahy foods except mixtures)
732- Pumpkin (all forms)
733- Winter squash (all forms)
76205- Squash, baby
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetables mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures; includes baby foods)
Asparagus
4941 - Fresh Asparagus (and home canned/froz.)
5114101 Comm. Canned Asparagus
5115.101 Asparagus. Low Sodium, Comm. Canned
521.11 Gmmi, I-Yo/sen Asparagus
(docs not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-cal dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
7510080 Asparagus, raw
75202- Asparagus, cooked
7540101 Asparagus, creamed or with cheese
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetables mixtures, or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
Page
12A-8
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
Appendix 12A. Food Codes and Definitins Used in Analysis of the 1987/88 USDA NFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
Lima Beans
4942- Fresh Lima and Fava Beans (and home
canned/froz.)
5114204 Comm. Canned Mature Lima Beans
5114301 Comm. Canned Green Lima Beans
5115304 Comm. Canned Low Sodium Lima Beans
52132- Comm. Frozen Lima Beans
54111 - Dried Lima Beans
5411306 Dried Fava Beans
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures: does not
include succotash)
7510200 Lima Beans, raw
752040- Lima Beans, cooked
752041 - Lima Beans, canned
75402- Lima Beans with sauce
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures: or
vegetable with meat mixtures; does not include succotash)
Cabbage
4944- Fresh Cabbage (and home canned/froz.)
4958601 Sauerkraut, home canned or pkgd
5114801 Sauerkraut, comm. canned
5114904 Comm. Canned Cabbage
5114905 Comm. Canned Cabbage (no sauce; incl. baby)
5115501 Sauerkraut, low sodium., comm. canned
5312102 Sauerkraut Juice, comm. canned
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
7510300 Cabbage, raw
7510400 Cabbage, Chinese, raw
7510500 Cabbage, red, raw
7514100 Cabbage salad or coleslaw
7514130 Cabbage, Chinese, salad
75210- Chinese Cabbage, cooked
75211 - Green Cabbage, cooked
75212- Red Cabbage, cooked
752130- Savoy Cabbage, cooked
75230- Sauerkraut, cooked
7540701 Cabbage, creamed
755025- Cabbage, pickled or in relish
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures}
Lettuce
4945- Fresh Lettuce, French Endive (and home
canned/froz.)
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
75113- Lettuce, raw
75143- Lettuce salad with other veg.
7514410 Lettuce, wilted, with bacon dressing
7522005 Lettuce, cooked
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures: or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
Okra
4946- Fresh Okra (and home canned/froz.)
5114914 Comm. Canned Okra
5213720 Comm. Frozen Okra
5213721 Comm. Frozen Okra with Oth. Veg. & Sauce
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
lo-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
7522000 Okra, cooked, NS as to fat
7522001 Okra, cooked, fat not added
7522002 Okra, cooked, fat added
7522010 Lufta, cooked (Chinese Okra)
7541450 Okra, fried
7550700 Okra, pickled
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
Peas
4947- Fresh Peas (and home canned/froz.)
51147- Comm Canned Peas (incl. baby)
5115310 Low Sodium Green or English Peas (canned)
5115314 Low Sod. Blackeye, Gr. or Imm. Peas (canned)
5114205 Blackeyed Peas, comm. canned
52134- Comm. Frozen Peas
5412- Dried Peas and Lentils
does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
o-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
7512000 Peas, green, raw
7512775 Snowpeas, raw
75223- Peas, cowpeas, field or blackeye, cooked
75224- Peas, green, cooked
75225- Peas, pigeon, cooked
75231 - Snowpeas, cooked
7541650 Pea salad
7541660 Pea salad with cheese
75417- Peas, with sauce or creamed
76409- Peas, baby
76411 - Peas, creamed, baby
does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures: includes baby foods except
mixtures)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
12A-9
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
Appendix 12A. Food Codes and Defmitinos Used in Analysis of the 1987/88 USDA NFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
Cucumbers
4952- Fresh Cucumbers (and home canned/froz.)
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
lo-cat dinners: includes baby foods except mixtures)
7511100 Cucumbers, raw
75142- Cucumber salads
752167- Cucumbers, cooked
7550301 Cucumber pickles, dill
7550302 Cucumber pickles, relish
7550303 Cucumber pickles, sour
7550304 Cucumber pickles, sweet
7550305 Cucumber pickles, fresh
7550307 Cucumber, Kim Chee
7550311 Cucumber pickles, dill, reduced salt
7550314 Cucumber pickles, sweet, reduced salt
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
Beets
4954- Fresh Beets (and home canned/froz.)
51145- Comm. Canned Beets (incl. baby)
5115305 Low Sodium Beets (canned)
5213714 Comm. Frozen Beets
5312104 Beet Juice
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
7510250 Beets, raw
752080- Beets, cooked
752081- Beets, canned
7540501 Beets, harvard
7550021 Beets, pickled
76403- Beets, baby
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures; includes baby foods except
mixtures)
Strawberries
5022- Fresh Strawberries
5122801 Comm. Canned Strawberries with sugar
5122802 Comm. Canned Strawberries without sugar
5122803 Canned Strawberry Pie Filling.
5222- Comm. Frozen Strawberries
(does not include ready-to-eat dinners; includes baby foods
except mixtures)
6322- Strawberries
6413250 Strawberry Juice
(includes baby food; except mixtures)
Other
Berries
5033- Fresh Berries Other than Strawberries
5122804 Comm. Canned Blackberries with sugar
5122805 Comm. Canned Blackberries without sugar
5122806 Comm. Canned Blueberries with sugar
5122807 Cornm. Canned Blueberries without sugar
5122808 Canned Blueberry Pie Filling
5122809 Comm. Canned Gooseberries with sugar
5122810 Comm. Canned Gooseberries without sugar
5122811 Comm. Canned Raspberries with sugar
5122812 Comm. Canned Raspberries without sugar
5122813 Comm. Canned Cranberry Sauce
5122815 Comm. Canned Cranberry-Orange Relish
52233- Comm. Frozen Berries (not strawberries)
5332404 Blackberry Juice (home and comm. canned)
5423114 Dried Berries (not strawberries)
(does not include ready-to-eat dinners; includes baby foods
except mixtures)
6320- Other Berries
6321- Other Berries
6341101 Cranberry salad
6410460 Blackberry Juice
64105- Cranberry Juice
(includes baby food; except mixtures)
Page
12A-10
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
Appendix I2A. Food Codes and Definitins Used in Analysis of the 1987/88 USDA MFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
Peaches
5036- Fresh Peaches
51224- Comm. Canned Peaches (incl. baby)
5223601 Comm. Frozen Peaches
5332405 Home Canned Peach Juice
5423105 Dried Peaches (baby)
5423106 Dried Peaches
(does not include ready-to-eat dinners; includes baby foods
except mixtures)
62116- Dried Peaches
63135- Peaches
6412203 Peach Juice
6420501 Peach Nectar
67108- Peaches,baby
6711450 Peaches, dry, baby
(includes baby food; except mixtures)
Pears
5037- Fresh Pears
51225- Comm. Canned Pears (incl. baby)
5332403 Comm. Canned Pear Juice, baby
5362204 Fresh Pear Juice
5423107 Dried Pears
(does not include ready-to-eat dinners; includes baby foods
except mixtures)
62119- Dried Pears
63137- Pears
6341201 Pear salad
6421501 Pear Nectar
67109- Pears, baby
6711455 Pears, dry, baby
(includes baby food; except mixtures)
EXPOSED/PROTECTED FRUITS/VEGETABLES, ROOT VEGETABLES
Exposed
Fruits
5022- Strawberries, fresh
5023101 Acerola, fresh
5023401 Currants, fresh
5031 - Apples/Applesauce, fresh
5033- Berries other than Strawberries, fresh
5034- Cherries, fresh
5036- Peaches, fresh
5037- Pears, fresh
50381 - Apricots, Nectarines, Loquats, fresh
5038305 Dates, fresh
50384- Grapes, fresh
50386- Plums, fresh
50387- Rhubarb, fresh
5038805 Persimmons, fresh
5038901 Sapote, fresh
51221 - Apples/Applesauce, canned
51222- Apricots, canned
51223- Cherries, canned
51224- Peaches, canned
51225- Pears, canned
51228- Berries, canned
5122903 Grapes with sugar, canned
5122904 Grapes without sugar, canned
5122905 Plums with sugar, canned
5122906 Plums without sugar, canned
5122907 Plums, canned, baby
5122911 Prunes, canned, baby
5122912 Prunes, with sugar, canned
5122913 Prunes, without sugar, canned
5122914 Raisin Pie Filling
5222- Frozen Strawberries
52231 - Apples Slices, frozen
52233- Berries, frozen
52234- Cherries, frozen
52236- Peaches, frozen
52239- Rhubarb, frozen
53321 - Canned Apple Juice
53322- Canned Grape Juice
62101- Apple, dried
62104- Apricot, dried
62108- Currants, dried
62110- Date, dried
62116- Peaches, dried
62119- Pears, dried
62121- Plum, dried
62122- Prune, dried
62125- Raisins
63101- Apples/applesauce
63102- Wi-apple
63103- Apricots
63111 - Cherries, maraschino
63112- Acerola
63113- Cherries, sour
63115- Cherries, sweet
63117- Currants, raw
63123- Grapes
6312601 Juneberry
63131- Nectarine
63135- Peach
63137- Pear
63139- Persimmons
63143- Plum
63146- Quince
63147- Rhubarb/Sapodillo
632- Berries
64101- Apple Cider
64104- Apple Juice
64105- Cranberry Juice
64116- Grape Juice
64122- Peach Juice
64132- Prune/Strawberry Juice
6420101 Apricot Nectar
64205- Peach Nectar
64215- Pear Nectar
67102- Applesauce, baby
67108- Peaches, baby
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
12A-11
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
Appendix 12A. Food Codes and Definitinos Used in Analysis of the 1987/88 USDA NFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
Exposed
Fniits
(continued)
5332402 Canned Pmne Juice
5332403 Canned Pear Juice
5332404 Canned Blackberry Juice
5332405 Canned Peach Juice
53421 - Frozen Grape Juice
5342201 Frozen Apple Juice, comm.fr.
5342202 Frozen Apple Juice, home fr.
5352101 Apple Juice, asep. packed
5352201 Grape Juice, asep. packed
5362101 Apple Juice, fresh
5362202 Apricot Juice, fresh
5362203 Grape Juice, fresh
5362204 Pear Juice, fresh
5362205 Prune Juice, fresh
5421- Dried Prunes
5422- Raisins, Currants, dried
5423101 Dry Apples
5423102 Dry Apricots
5423103 Dates without pits
5423104 Dates with pits
5423105 Peaches, dry, baby
5423106 Peaches, dry
5423107 Pears, dry
5423114 Berries, dry
5423115 Cherries, dry
(includes baby foods)
67109- Pears, baby
6711450 Peaches, baby, dry
6711455 Pears, baby, dry
67202- Apple Juice, baby
6720380 White Grape Juice, baby
67212- Pear Juice, baby
(includes baby foods/juices except mixtures; excludes
fruit mixtures)
Protected
Fruits
501 - Citrus Fruits, fresh
5021- Cantaloupe, fresh
5023201 Mangoes, fresh
5023301 Guava, fresh
5023601 Kiwi, fresh
5023701 Papayas, fresh
5023801 Passion Fruit, fresh .
5032- Bananas, Plantains, fresh
5035- Melons other than Cantaloupe, fresh
50382- Avocados, fresh
5038301 Figs, fresh
5038302 Figs, cooked
5038303 Figs, home canned
5038304 Figs, home frozen
50385- Pineapple, fresh
5038801 Pomegranates, fresh
5038902 Cherimoya, fresh
5038903 Jackfruit, fresh
5038904 Breadfruit, fresh
5038905 Tamarind, fresh
5038906 Carambola, fresh
5038907 Longan, fresh
5121- Citrus, canned
51226- Pineapple, canned
5I22901Figswith sugar, canned
5122902 Figs without sugar, canned
5122909 Bananas, canned, baby
5122910 Bananas and Pineapple, canned, baby
5l229l5Litchis.canned
61 - Citrus Fr., Juices (incl. cit. juice mixtures)
62107- Bananas, dried
62113- Figs, dried
62114- Lychees/Papayas, dried
62120- Pineapple, dried
62126- Tamarind, dried
63105- Avocado, raw
63107- Bananas
63109- Cantaloupe, Carambola
63110- Cassaba Melon
63119- Figs
63121- Genip
63125- Guava/Jackfruit, raw
6312650 Kiwi
6312651Lychee,raw
6312660 Lychee, cooked
63127- Honeydew
63129- Mango
63133- Papaya
63134- Passion Fruit
63141- Pineapple
63145- Pomegranate
63148- Sweetsop, Soursop, Tamarind
63149- Watermelon
64120- Papaya Juice
64121 - Passion Fruit Juice
64124- Pineapple Juice
64133- Watermelon Juice
6420150 Banana Nectar
Page
12A-12
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
Appendix 12 A. Food Codes and Dufmitins Used in Analysis of the 1987/88 USD A NFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
Protected
Fruits
(continued)
5122916 Mangos with sugar, canned
5122917 Mangos without sugar, canned
5122918 Mangos, canned, baby
5122920 Guava with sugar, canned
5122921 Guava without sugar, canned
5122923 Papaya with sugar, canned
5122924 Papaya without sugar, canned
52232- Bananas, frozen
52235- Melon, frozen
52237- Pineapple, frozen
5331- Canned Citrus Juices
53323- Canned Pineapple Juice
5332408 Canned Papaya Juice
5332410 Canned Mango Juice
5332501 Canned Papaya Concentrate
5341- Frozen Citrus Juice
5342203 Frozen Pineapple Juice
5351 - Citrus and Citrus Blend Juices, asep. packed
5352302 Pineapple Juice, asep. packed
5361- Fresh Citrus and Citrus Blend Juices
5362206 Papaya Juice, fresh
5362207 Pineapple-Coconut Juice, fresh
5362208 Mango Juice, fresh
5362209 Pineapple Juice, fresh
5423108 Pineapple, dry
5423109 Papaya, dry
5423110 Bananas, dry
5423111 Mangos, dry
5423117 Litchis, dry
5423118 Tamarind, dry
5423119 Plantain, dry
(includes baby foods)
64202- Cantaloupe Nectar
64203- Guava Nectar
64204- Mango Nectar
64210- Papaya Nectar
64213- Passion Fruit Nectar
64221 - Soursop Nectar
6710503 Bananas, baby
6711500 Bananas, baby, dry
6720500 Orange Juice, baby
6721300 Pineapple Juice, baby
(includes baby foods/juices except mixtures; excludes fruit
mixtures)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
12A-13
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
Appendix 12A. Food Codes and Defmitinos Used in Analysis of the 1987/88 USDA NFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
Exposed
Veg.
491- Fresh Dark Green Vegetables
493- Fresh Tomatoes
4941- Fresh Asparagus
4943- Fresh Beans, Snap or Wax
4944- Fresh Cabbage
4945- Fresh Lettuce
4946- Fresh Okra
49481- Fresh Artichokes
49483- Fresh Brussel Sprouts
4951- Fresh Celery
4952- Fresh Cucumbers
4955- Fresh Cauliflower
4958103 Fresh Kohlrabi
4958111 Fresh Jerusalem Artichokes
4958112 Fresh Mushrooms
4958113 Mushrooms, home canned
4958114 Mushrooms, home frozen
4958118 Fresh Eggplant
4958119 Eggplant, cooked
4958120 Eggplant, home frozen
4958200 Fresh Summer Squash
4958201 Summer Squash, cooked
4958202 Summer Squash, home canned
4958203 Summer Squash, home frozen
4958402 Fresh Bean Sprouts
4958403 Fresh Alfalfa Sprouts
4958504 Bamboo Shoots
4958506 Seaweed
4958508 Tree Fern, fresh
4958601 Sauerkraut
5111- Dark Green Vegetables (all are exposed)
5113- Tomatoes
5114101 Asparagus, comm. canned
51144- Beans, green, snap, yellow, comm. canned
5114704 Snow Peas, comm. canned
5114801 Sauerkraut, comm. canned
5114901 Artichokes, comm. canned
5114902 Bamboo Shoots, comm. canned
5114903 Bean Sprouts, comm. canned
5114904 Cabbage, comm. canned
5114905 Cabbage, comm. canned, no sauce
5114906 Cauliflower, comm. canned, no sauce
5114907 Eggplant, comm. canned, no sauce
5114913 Mushrooms, comm. canned
5114914 Okra. comm. canned
5114918 Seaweeds, comm. canned
5114920 Summer Squash, comm. canned
721- Dark Green Leafy Veg.
722- Dark Green Nonleafy Veg.
74- Tomatoes and Tomato Mixtures
7510050 Alfalfa Sprouts
7510075 Artichoke, Jerusalem, raw
7510080 Asparagus, raw
75101- Beans, sprouts and green, raw
7510275 Brussel Sprouts, raw
7510280 Buckwheat Sprouts, raw
7510300 Cabbage, raw
7510400 Cabbage, Chinese, raw
7510500 Cabbage. Red, raw
7510700 Cauliflower, raw
7510900 Celery, raw
7510950 Chives, raw
75II100 Cucumber, raw
7511120 Eggplant, raw
7511200 Kohlrabi, raw
75113- Lettuce, raw
7511500 Mushrooms, raw
7511900 Parsley
7512100 Pepper, hot chili
75122- Peppers, raw
7512750 Seaweed, raw
7512775 Snowpeas, raw
75128- Summer Squash, raw
7513210 Celery Juice
7514100 Cabbage or cole slaw
7514130 Chinese Cabbage Salad
7514150 Celery with cheese
75142- Cucumber salads
75143- Lettuce salads
7514410 Lettuce, wilted with bacon dressing
7514600 Greek salad
7514700 Spinach salad
7520600 Algae, dried
75201 - Artichoke, cooked
75202- Asparagus, cooked
75203- Bamboo shoots, cooked
752049- Beans, string, cooked
75205- Beans, green, cooked/canned
75206- Beans, yellow, cooked/canned
75207- Bean Sprouts, cooked
752085- Breadfruit
752090- Brussel Sprouts, cooked
75210- Cabbage. Chinese, cooked
75211 - Cabbage, green, cooked
Page
I2A-14
Exposure Factors Handbook
Aueust 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
Appendix 12A. Food Codes and Definitins Used in Analysis of the 1987/88 USDA NFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
Exposed
Veg.
(cow.)
5114923 Chinese or Celery Cabbage, comin. canned
51152- Tomatoes, canned, low sod.
5115301 Asparagus, canned, low sod.
5115302 Beans, Green, canned, low sod.
5115303 Beans, Yellow, canned, low sod.
5115309 Mushrooms, canned, low sod.
51154- Greens, canned, low sod.
5115501 Sauerkraut, low sodium
5211 - Dark Gr. Veg., comm. frozen (all exp.)
52131- Asparagus, comm. froz.
52133- Beans, snap, green, yellow, comm. froz.
5213407 Peapods, comm froz.
5213408 Peapods, with sauce, comm froz.
5213409 Peapods, with other veg., comm froz.
5213701 Brussel Sprouts, comm. froz.
5213702 Brussel Sprouts, comm. froz. with cheese
5213703 Brussel Sprouts, comm. froz. with other veg.
5213705 Cauliflower, comm. froz.
5213706 Cauliflower, comm. froz. with sauce
5213707 Cauliflower, comm. froz. with other veg.
5213708 Caul., comm. froz. with other veg. & sauce
5213709 Summer Squash, comm. froz.
5213710 Summer Squash, comm. froz. with other veg.
5213716 Eggplant, comm. froz.
5213718 Mushrooms with sauce, comm. froz.
5213719 Mushrooms, comm. froz.
5213720 Okra, comm. froz.
5213721 Okra; comm. froz., with sauce
5311- Canned Tomato Juice and Tomato Mixtures
5312102 Canned Sauerkraut Juice
5321 - Frozen Tomato Juice
5371- Fresh Tomato Juice
5381102 Aseptically Packed Tomato Juice
5413101 Dry Algae
5413102 Dry Celery
5413103 Dry Chives
5413109 Dry Mushrooms
5413111 Dry Parsley
5413112 Dry Green Peppers
5413113 Dry Red Peppers
5413114 Dry Seaweed
5413115 Dry Tomatoes
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures)
75212- Cabbage, red, cooked
752130- Cabbage, savoy, cooked
75214- Cauliflower
75215- Celery, Chives, Christophine (chayote)
752167- Cucumber, cooked
752170- Eggplant, cooked
752171- Fern shoots
752172- Fern shoots
752173- Flowers of sesbania, squash or lily
7521801 Kohlrabi, cooked
75219- Mushrooms, cooked
75220- Okra/lettuce, cooked
7522116 Palm Hearts, cooked
7522121 Parsley, cooked
75226- Peppers, pimento, cooked
75230- Sauerkraut, cooked/canned
75231 - Snowpeas, cooked
75232- Seaweed
75233- Summer Squash
7540050 Artichokes, stuffed
7540101 Asparagus, creamed or with cheese
75403- Beans, green with sauce
75404- Beans, yellow with sauce
7540601 Brussel Sprouts, creamed
7540701 Cabbage, creamed
75409- ' Cauliflower, creamed
75410- Celery/Chiles, creamed
75412- Eggplant, fried, with sauce, etc.
75413- Kohlrabi, creamed
75414- Mushrooms, Okra, fried, stuffed, creamed
754180- Squash, baked, fried, creamed, etc.
7541822 Christophine, creamed
7550011 Beans, pickled
7550051 Celery, pickled
7550201 Cauliflower, pickled
755025- Cabbage, pickled
7550301 Cucumber pickles, dill
7550302 Cucumber pickles, relish
7550303 Cucumber pickles, sour
7550304 Cucumber pickles, sweet
7550305 Cucumber pickles, fresh
7550307 Cucumber, Kim Chee
7550308 Eggplant, pickled
7550311 Cucumber pickles, dill, reduced salt
7550314 Cucumber pickles, sweet, reduced salt
7550500 Mushrooms, pickled
7550700 Okra. pickled
75510- Olives
7551101 Peppers, hot
7551102 Peppers,pickled
7551301 Seaweed, pickled
7553500 Zucchini, pickled
76102- Dark Green Veg., baby
76401- Beans, baby (excl. most soups & mixtures)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
12A-15
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
Appendix 12A. Food Codes and Definitinos Used in Analysis of the 1987/88 USDANFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Codc/Deflnition
Individual Code
Protected
Veg,
4922- Fresh Pumpkin, Winter Squash
4942- Fresh Lima Beans
4947- Fresh Peas
49482- Fresh Soy Beans
4956- Fresh Com
4958303 Succotash, home canned
4958304 Succotash, home frozen
4958401 Fresh Cactus (prickly pear)
4958503 Burdock
4958505 Bitter Melon
4958507 Horseradish Tree Pods
51122- Comm. Canned Pumpkin and Squash (baby)
51142- Beans, comm. canned
51143- Beans, lima and soy, comm. canned
51146- Com, comm. canned
5114701 Peas, green, comm. canned
5114702 Peas, baby, comm. canned
5114703 Peas, blackeye, comm. canned
5114705 Pigeon Peas, comm. canned
5114919 Succotash, comm. canned
5115304 Lima Beans, canned, low sod.
5115306 Corn, canned, low sod.
5115307 Creamed Com, canned, low sod.
511531- Peas and Beans, canned, low sod.
52122- Winter Squash, comm. froz.
52132- Lima Beans, comm. froz.
5213401 Peas, gr., comm. froz.
5213402 Peas, gr., with sauce, comm. froz.
5213403 Peas, gr., with other veg., comm. froz.
5213404 Peas, gr., with other veg., comm. froz.
5213405 Peas, blackeye, comm froz.
5213406 Peas, blackeye, with sauce, comm froz.
52135- Com, comm. froz.
5213712 Artichoke Hearts, comm. froz.
5213713 Baked Beans, comm. froz.
5213717 Kidney Beans, comm. froz.
5213724 Succotash, comm. froz.
5411- Dried Beans
5412- Dried Peas and Lentils
5413104 Dry Com
5413106 Dry Hominy
5413504 Dry Squash, baby
5413603 Dry Creamed Corn, baby
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
lo-eal dinners: includes baby foods except mixtures!
732- Pumpkin
733- Winter Squash
7510200 Lima Beans, raw
7510550 Cactus, raw
7510960 Corn, raw
7512000 Peas, raw
7520070 Aloe vera juice
752040- Lima Beans, cooked
752041- Lima Beans, canned
7520829 Bitter Melon
752083- Bitter Melon, cooked
7520950 Burdock
752131- Cactus
752160- Corn, cooked
752161 - Corn, yellow, cooked
752162- Corn, white, cooked
752163- Com, canned
7521749 Hominy
752175- Hominy
75223- Peas, cowpeas, field or blackeye. cooked
75224- Peas, green, cooked
75225- Peas, pigeon, cooked
75301- Succotash
75402- Lima Beans with sauce
75411- Com, scalloped, fritter, with cream
7541650 Pea salad
7541660 Pea salad with cheese
75417- Peas, with sauce or creamed
7550101 Corn relish
76205- Squash, yellow, baby
76405- Corn, baby
76409- Peas, baby
76411 - Peas, creamed, baby
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
Page
12A-16
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
Appendix I2A. Food Codusand Definitins Used in Analysis of the 1987/88 USDA NFCS Dam (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
Root
Vegetables
48- Potatoes, Sweetpotatoes
4921- Fresh Carrots
4953- Fresh Onions, Garlic
4954- Fresh Beets
4957- Fresh Turnips
4958101 Fresh Celeriac
4958102 Fresh Horseradish
4958104 Fresh Radishes, no greens
4958105 Radishes, home canned
4958106 Radishes, home frozen
4958107 Fresh Radishes, with greens
4958108 Fresh Salsify
4958109 Fresh Rutabagas
4958110 Rutabagas, home frozen
4958115 Fresh Parsnips
4958116 Parsnips, home canned
4958117 Parsnips, home frozen
4958502 Fresh Lotus Root
4958509 Ginger Root
4958510 Jicama, including yambean
51121 - Carrots, comm. canned
51145- Beets, comm. canned
5114908 Garlic Pulp, comm. canned
5114910 Horseradish, comm. prep.
5114915 Onions, comm. canned
5114916 Rutabagas, comm. canned
5114917 Salsify, comm. canned
5114921 Turnips, comm. canned
5114922 Water Chestnuts, comm. canned
51151- Carrots, canned, low sod.
5115305 Beets, canned, low sod.
5115502 Turnips, low sod.
52121 - Carrots, comm. froz.
5213714 Beets, comm. froz.
5213722 Onions, comm. froz.
5213723 Onions, comm. froz., with sauce
5213725 Turnips, comm. froz.
5312103 Canned Carrot Juice
5312104 Canned Beet Juice
5372102 Fresh Carrot Juice
5413105 Dry Garlic
5413110 Dry Onion
5413502 Dry Carrots, baby
5413503 Dry Sweet Potatoes, baby
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners: includes baby foods except mixtures)
71- White Potatoes and Puerto Rican St. Veg.
7310- Carrots
7311140 Carrots in sauce
7311200 Carrot chips
734- Sweetpotatoes
7510250 Beets, raw
75lll50Garlicrraw
7511180 Jicama (yambean), raw
7511250 Leeks, raw
75117- Onions, raw
7512500 Radish, raw
7512700 Rutabaga, raw
7512900 Turnip, raw
752080- Beets, cooked
752081- Beets, canned
7521362 Cassava
7521740 Garlic, cooked
7521771 Horseradish
7521850 Lotus root
752210- Onions, cooked
7522110 Onions, dehydrated
752220- Parsnips, cooked
75227- Radishes, cooked
75228- Rutabaga, cooked
75229- Salsify, cooked
75234- Turnip, cooked
75235- Water Chestnut
7540501 Beets, harvard
75415- Onions, creamed, fried
7541601 Parsnips, creamed
7541810 Turnips, creamed
7550021 Beets, pickled
7550309 Horseradish
7551201 Radishes, pickled
7553403 Turnip, pickled
76201- Carrots, baby
76209- Sweetpotatoes. baby
76403- Beets, baby
(does not include vegetable soups; vegetable mixtures; or
vegetable with meat mixtures)
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
12A-17
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
Appendix 12A. Food Codes and Defmitinos Used in Analysis of the 1987/gg USDA MFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
USDA SUBCATEGORIES
Dark Green
Vegetables
491- Fresh Dark Green Vegetables
5111 - Comm. Canned Dark Green Veg.
51154- Low Sodium Dark Green Veg.
5211 - Comm. Frozen Dark Green Veg.
5413111 Dry Parsley
5413112 Dry Green Peppers
5413113 Dry Red Peppers
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures/dinners;
excludes vegetable juices and dried vegetables)
72- Dark Green Vegetables
all forms
leafy, nonleafy, dk. gr. veg. soups
Deep
Yellow
Vegetables
492- Fresh Deep Yellow Vegetables
5112- Comm. Canned Deep Yellow Veg.
51151- Low Sodium Carrots
5212- Comm. Frozen Deep Yellow Veg.
5312103 Carrot Juice
54135- Dry Carrots, Squash, Sw. Potatoes
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eaป dinners: includes baby foods except mixtures/dinners;
excludes vegetable juices and dried vegetables)
73- Deep Yellow Vegetables
all forms
carrots, pumpkin, squash, sweetpotatoes, dp. yell.
veg.soups
Other
Vegetables
494- Fresh Light Green Vegetables
495- Fresh Other Vegetables
5114- Comm. Canned Other Veg.
51153- Low vSodium Other Veg.
51155- Low Sodium Other Veg.
5213- Comm. Frozen Other Veg.
5312102 Sauerkraut Juice
5312104 Beet Juice
5411- Dreid Beans
5412- Dried Peas, Lentils
541310- Dried Other Veg.
5413114 Dry Seaweed
5413603 Dry Cr. Com, baby
(does not include soups, sauces, gravies, mixtures, and ready-
to-eat dinners; includes baby foods except mixtures/dinners;
excludes vegetable juices and dried vegetables)
75-
Other Vegetables
all forms
Citrus Fruits
501- Fresh Citrus Fruits
5121 - Comm. Canned Citrus Fruits
5331- Canned Citrus and Citrus Blend Juice
5341- Frozen Citrus and Citrus Blend Juice
5351 - Aseptically Packed Citrus and Citr. Blend Juice
5361 - Fresh Citrus and Citrus Blend Juice
(includes baby foods: excludes dried fruits)
61- Citrus Fruits and Juices
6720500 Orange Juice, baby food
6720600 Orange-Apricot Juice, baby food
6720700 Orange-Pineapple Juice, baby food
6721100 Orange-Apple-Banana Juice, baby food
(excludes dried fruits)
Page
I2A-I8
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 12 - Intake Rates for Various Home Produced Food Items
Appendix 12 A. Food Codes and Definitins Used in Analysis of the 1987/88 USDA NFCS Data (continued)
Food
Product
Household Code/Definition
Individual Code
Other Fruits
502- Fresh Other Vitamin C-Rich Fruits
503- Fresh Other Fruits
5122- Comm. Canned Fruits Other than Citrus
5222- Frozen Strawberries
5223- Frozen Other than Citr. or Vitamin C-Rich Fr.
5332- Canned Fruit Juice Othsr than Citrus
5342- Frozen Juices Other than Citrus
5352- Aseptically Packed Fruit Juice Other than Citr.
5362- Fresh Fruit Juice Other than Citrus
542- Dry Fruits
(includes baby foods; excludes dried fruits)
62- Dried Fruits
63- Other Fruits
64- Fruit Juices and Nectars Excluding Citrus
671- Fruits, baby
67202- Apple Juice, baby
67203- Baby Juices
67204- Baby Juices
67212- Baby Juices
67213- Baby Juices
673- Baby Fruits
674- Baby Fruits
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
12A-I9
-------
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 13 - Breast Milk Intake
13. BREAST MILK INTAKE
13.1. BACKGROUND
Breast milk is a potential source of exposure to ,toxic
substances for nursing infants. Lipid soluble chemical
compounds accumulate in body fat and may be transferred
to breast-fed infants in the lipid portion of breast milk.
Because nursing infants obtain most (if not all) of their
dietary intake from breast milk, they are especially
vulnerable to exposures to these compounds. Estimating
the magnitude of the potential dose to infants from breast
milk requires information on the quantity of breast milk
consumed per day and the duration (months) over which
breast-feeding occurs. Information on the fat content of
breast milk is also needed for estimating dose from breast
milk residue concentrations that have been indexed to lipid
content.
Several studies have generated data on breast milk
intake. Typically, breast milk intake has been measured
over a 24-hour period by weighing the infant before and
after each feeding without changing its clothing (test
weighing). The sum of the difference between the measured
weights over the 24-hour period is assumed to be equivalent
to the amount of breast milk consumed daily. Intakes
measured using this procedure are often corrected for
evaporative water losses (insensible water losses) between
infant weighings (NAS, 1991). Neville et al. (1988)
evaluated the validity of the test weight approach among
bottle-fed infants by comparing the weights of milk taken
from bottles with the differences between the infants'
weights before and after feeding. When test weight data
were corrected for insensible water loss, they were not
significantly different from bottle weights. Conversions
between weight and volume of breast milk consumed are
made using the density of human milk (approximately 1.03
g/mL) (NAS, 1991). Recently, techniques for measuring
breast milk intake using stable isotopes have been
developed. However, few data based on this new technique
have been published (NAS, 1991).
Studies among nursing mothers in industrialized
countries have shown that intakes among infants average
approximately 750 to 800 g/day (728 to 777 mL/day)
during the first 4 to 5 months of life with a range of 450 to
1,200 g/day (437 to 1,165 mL/day) (NAS, 1991). Similar
intakes have also been reported for developing countries
(NAS, 1991). Infant birth weight and nursing frequency
have been shown to influence the rate of intake (NAS,
1991). Infants who are larger at birth and/or nurse more
frequently have been shown to have higher intake rates.
Also, breast milk production among nursing mothers has
been reported to be somewhat higher than the amount
actually consumed by the infant (NAS, 1991).
The available studies on breast milk intake are
summarized in the following sections. Studies on breast
milk intake rates have been classified as either key studies
or relevant studies based on the criteria described in the
Introduction (Volume I, Section 1.3.1). Recommended
intake rates are based on the results of key studies, but
relevant studies are also presented to provide the reader
with added perspective on the current state of knowledge
pertaining to breast milk intake.
Relevant data on lipid content and fat intake, energy
content and energy intake, breast-feeding duration and
frequency, and the estimated percentage of the U.S.
population that breast-feeds are also presented.
13.2. KEY STUDIES ON BREAST MILK INTAKE
Pao et al. - Milk Intakes and Feeding Patterns of
Breast-fed Infants - Pao et al. (1980) conducted a study of
22 healthy breast-fed infants to estimate breast milk intake
rates. Infants were categorized as completely breast-fed or
partially breast-fed. Breast feeding mothers were recruited
through LaLeche League groups. Except for one black
infant, all other infants were from white middle-class
families in southwestern Ohio. The goal of the study was to
enroll infants as close to one month of age as possible and
to obtain records near one, three, six, and nine months of
age (Pao et al., 1980). However, not all mother/infant pairs
participated at each time interval. Data were collected for
these 22 infants using the test weighing method. Records
were collected for three consecutive 24-hour periods at each
test interval. The weight of breast milk was converted to
volume by assuming a density of 1.03 g/mL. Daily intake
rates were calculated for each infant based on the mean of
the three 24-hour periods. Mean daily breast milk intake
rates for the infants surveyed at each time interval are
presented in Table 13-1. For completely breast-fed infants,
the mean intake rates were 600 mL/day at 1 month of age
and 833 mL/day at 3 months of age. Partially breast-fed
infants had mean intake rates of 485 mL/day, 467 mL/day,
395 mL/day, and 554 mL/day at 1, 3, 6, and 9 months of
age, respectively. Pao et al. (1980) also noted that intake
rates for boys in both groups were slightly higher than for
girls.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
13-1
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 13 - Breast Milk Intake
Tซb!c 13-1. Daily Intakes of Breast Milk
Asc
Completely Brcut-fed
1 month
Smooths
6mof>ths
Partially Breast-fed
1 month
3 months
6 months
9 months
Number of
Infants
Surveyed at
Each Time
Period
11
2
1
4
11
6
3
Mean
Intake
imL/day)
600 ฑ 159
833
682
485 ฑ 79
467 ฑ 100
395 ฑ 175
<554
Range of
Daily Intake
(mL/day)
426-989
645 - 1,000
616 - 786
398-655
242-698
147-684
451 - 732
* Dปu expressed is mean ฑ standard deviation.
Source: Paoetal., 1980.
The advantage of this study is that data for both
exclusively and partially breast-fed infants were collected
for multiple time periods. Also, data for individual infants
were collected over 3 consecutive days which would
account for some individual variability. However, the
number of infants in the study was relatively small and may
not be entirely representative of the U.S. population based
on race and socioeconomic status which may introduce
some bias in the results. In addition, this study did not
account for insensible water loss which may underestimate
the amount of breast milk ingested.
Butte et at. - Human Milk Intake and Growth in
Exclusively Breast-fed Infants - Breast milk intake was
studied in exclusively breast-fed infants during the first 4
months oflife (Butte et al., 1984). Breastfeeding mothers
were recruited through the Baylor Milk Bank Program in
Texas. Forty-five mother/infant pairs participated in the
study. However, data for some time periods (i.e., 1,2,3, or
4 months) were missing for some mothers as a result of
illness or other factors. The mothers were from the middle-
to upper-socioeconomic stratum and had a mean age of 28.0
ฑ3.1 years. A total of 41 mothers were white, 2 were
Hispanic, 1 was Asian, and 1 was West Indian. Infant
growth progressed satisfactorily over the course of the
study. The amount of milk ingested over a 24-hour period
was determined using the test weighing procedure. Test
weighing occurred over a 24-hour period for most
participants, but intake among several infants was studied
over longer periods (48 to 96 hours) to assess individual
variation in intake. The study did not indicate whether the
data were corrected for insensible water loss. Mean breast
milk intake ranged from 723 g/day (702 mL/day) at 3
months to 751 g/day (729 midday) at 1 month, with an
overall mean of 733 g/day (712 mL/day) for the entire study
period (Table 13-2). Intakes were also calculated on the
basis of body weight (Table 13-2). Based on the results of
test weighings conducted over 48 to 96 hours, the mean
variation in individual daily intake was estimated to be
7.9ฑ3.6 percent.
Table 13-2. Breast Milk Intake Among Exclusively Breast-fed
Infants During the First 4 Months of Life
Number
Age of
(months) Infants
1 37
2 40
3 37
4 41
Breast Milk
Intake*
(g/day)
751.0ฑ 130.0
725.0 ฑ131.0
723.0 ฑ114.0
740.0 ฑ128.0
Breast Milk
Intake1
(g/kg-day)
159.0ฑ24.0
129.0ฑ 19.0
11 7.0 ฑ20.0
111.0ฑ17.0
* Data expressed as mean ฑ standard deviation.
* Calculated by dividing breastmilk intake (g/day) by breastmilk
day).
Source: Butteetal., 1984.
Body
Weight"
(kg)
4.7
5.6
6.2
6.7
intake (g/kg-
The advantage of this study is that data for a larger
number of exclusively breast-fed infants were collected than
were collected by Pao et al. (1980). However, data were
collected over a shorter time period (i.e., 4 months
compared to 6 months) and day-to-day variability was
not characterized for all infants. In addition, the population
studied may not be representative of the U.S. population
based on race and socioeconomic status.
Neville et al. - Studies on Human Lactation -
Neville et al. (1988) studied breast milk intake among 13
infants during the first year of life. The mothers were all
multiparous, nonsmoking, Caucasian women of middle- to
upper-socioeconomic status living in Denver, Colorado
(Neville et al., 1988). All women in the study practiced
exclusive breast-feeding for at least 5 months. Solid foods
were introduced at mean age of 7 months. Daily milk intake
was estimated by the test weighing method with corrections
for insensible weight loss. Data were collected daily from
birth to 14 days, weekly from weeks 3 through 8, and
monthly until the study period ended at 1 year after
inception. The estimated breast milk intakes for this study
are listed in Table 13-3. Mean breast milk intakes were
770 g/day (748 mL/day), 734 g/day (713 mL/day), 766
g/day (744 mL/day), and 403 g/day (391 mL/day) at 1,3,6,
and 12 months of age, respectively.
Page
13-2
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 13 - Breast Milk Intake
Table 13-3. Breast Milk Intake During a 24-Hour Period
Age
(days)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
14
21
28
35
42
49
56
90
120
150
180
210
240
270
300
330
360
a
Source:
Number
of Infants
7
10
11
11
12
10
8
9
10
10
8
10
10
13
12
12
10
13
12
13
13
13
12
10
12
11
9
9
Mean
(g/day)
44
182
371
451
498
508
573
581
580
589
615
653
651
770
668
711
709
694
734
711
838
766
721
622
618
551
554
403
Standard
Deviation
(g/day)
71
86
153
176
129
167
167
159
76
132
168
154
84
179
117
111
115
98
114
100
134
121
154
210
220
234
240
250
Range
(g/day)
-31-149"
44-355
209-688
164-694
323-736
315-861
. 406-842
410-923
470-720
366-866
398-934
416-922
554-786
495-1 144
465-930
554-896
559-922
556-859
613-942
570-847
688-1173
508-936
486-963
288-1002
223-871
129-894
120-860
65-770
Negative value due to insensible water loss correction.
Neville etal..
1988.
In comparison to the previously described studies,
Neville et al. (1988) collected data on numerous days over
a relatively long time period (12 months) and they were
corrected for insensible weight loss. However, the intake
rates presented in Table 13-3 are estimated based on intake
during only a 24-hour period. Consequently, these intake
rates are based on short-term data that do not account for
day-to-day variability among individual infants. Also, a
smaller number of subjects was included than in the
previous studies, and the population studied may not be
representative of the U.S. population based on race and
socioeconomic status.
Dewey and Lonnerdal - Milk and Nutrient Intakes
of Breast-fed Infants - Dewey and Lonnerdal (1983)
monitored the dietary intake of 20 breast-fed infants
between the ages of 1 and 6 months. Most of the infants in
the study were exclusively breast-fed (five were given some
formula, and several were given small amounts of solid
foods after 3 months of age). According to Dewey and
Lonnerdal (1983), the mothers were all well educated and
recruited through Lamaze childbirth classes in the Davis
area of California. Breast milk intake volume was estimated
based on two 24-hour test weighings per month. Breast
milk intake rates for the various age groups are presented in
Table 13-4. Breast milk intake averaged 673,782, and 896
mL/day at 1,3, and 6 months of age, respectively.
Table 13-4. Breast Milk Intake for Infants Aged 1 to 6 Months
Age
(months)
1
2
3
4
5
6
Number
of Infants
16
19
16
13
11
11
Mean
(mL/day)
673
756
782
810
805
896
SD
(mL/day) "
192
170
172
142
117
122
Range
(mL/day)
341-1,003
449-1,055
492-1,053
593-1,045
554-1,045
675-1.096
' Standard deviation.
Source: Dewev and Lonnerdal, 1983.
The advantage of this study is that it evaluated
breast-fed infants for a period of 6 months based on two 24-
hour observations per infant per month. Corrections for
insensible water loss apparently were not made. Also, the
number of infants in the study was relatively small and may
not be representative of U.S. population based on race and
socioeconomic status.
Dewey et al. - The DARLING Study - The Davis
Area Research on Lactation, Infant Nutrition and Growth
(DARLING) study was conducted in 1986 to evaluate
growth patterns, nutrient intake, morbidity, and activity
levels in infants who were breast-fed for at least the first 12
months of life (Dewey etal., 1991a; 1991b). Seventy-three
infants aged 3 months were included in the study. The
number of infants included in the study at subsequent time
intervals was somewhat lower as a result of attrition. All
infants in the study were healthy and of normal gestational
age and weight at birth, and did not consume solid foods
until after the first 4 months of age. The mothers were
highly educated and of "relatively high socioeconomic
status" from the Davis area of California (Dewey et al.,
1991 a; 1991b). Breast milk intake was estimated by
weighing the infants before and alter each feeding and
correcting for insensible water loss. Test weighings were
conducted over a 4-day period every 3 months. The results
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
13-3
-------
Volume It- Food Ihgestion Factors
Chapter 13 * Breast Milk Intake
of the study indicate that breast milk intake declines over
the first 12 months of life. Mean breast milk intake was
estimated to be 812 g/day (788 mL/day) at 3 months and
448 g/day (435 mL/day) at 12 months (Table 13-5). Based
on the estimated intakes at 3 months of age, variability
between individuals (coefficient of variation (CV) = 16.3
percent) was higher than individual day-to-day variability
(CV = 5.4 percent) for the infants in the study (Dewey et al.,
199 la).
Table 13-5. Breast Milk Intake Estimated by the DARLING Study
Age Number of Mean Intake
(months) Infants (s/dav) ,
3
6
9
12
^Source:
73
60
50
42
Dewevetal.n991bV
812
769
646
448
Standard Deviation
(s/dav) .
133
171
217
251
The advantages of this study are that data were
collected over a relatively long-time (4 days) period at each
test interval which would account for some day-to-day
infant variability, and corrections for insensible water loss
were made. However, the population studied may not be
representative of the U.S. population based on race and
socioeconomic status.
13.3. OTHER RELEVANT STUDIES ON BREAST
MILK INTAKE
ffofvander et al. - The Amount of Milk Consumed
by 1- to 3-Month Old Infants - Hofvander et al. (1982)
compared milk intake among breast-fed and bottle-fed
infants at ages 1, 2, and 3 months of age. Intake of breast
milk and breast milk substitutes was tabulated for 25
Swedish infants in each age group. Daily intake among
breast-fed infants was estimated using the test weighing
method. Test weighings were conducted over a 24-hour
time period at each time interval. Daily milk intake among
bottle-fed infants was estimated by measuring the
volumetric differences in milk contained in bottles at the
beginning and end of all feeding sessions in a 24-hour
period. The mean intake rates for bottle-fed infants were
slightly higher than for breast-fed infants for all age groups
(Table 13-6). Also, boys consumed breast milk or breast
milk substitutes at a slightly higher rate than girls (Table
13-7). Breast milk intake was estimated to be 656 g/day
(637 mL/day) at 1 month and 776 g/day (753 mL/day) at 3
months.
table 13-6. Milk Intake for Bottle- and
Infants by Age Group
Age Breast Milk Substitutes
, (months) Mean(g/day)a
1 713
(500-1,000)
2 811
(670-1,180)
3 853
T655- 1.065V
Breast-fed
Breast Milk
Mean (g/day)a
656
(360-860)
773
(575-985)
776
(600-930)
* Range given in parentheses.
Source: Hofvanderet al.. 1982.
TableJ3-7.
Aee
Breast milk
1
2
3
Breast milk substitute
1
2
3
Milk Intake for Boys and Girls
Boys
Mean
(E/dav)
663
791
811
753
863
862
N
12
14
12
10
13
13
Girls
Mean
fe/dav)
649
750
743
687
753
843
N
13
11
13
15
12
12
Source: Hofvanderet al., 1982.
This study was conducted among a small number of
Swedish infants, but the results are similar to those
summarized previously for U.S. studies. Insensible water
losses were apparently not considered in this study, and only
short-term data were collected.
Kohler et al. - Food Intake and Growth of Infants -
KShler et al. (1984) evaluated breast milk and formula
intake among normal infants between the ages of 6 and 26
weeks. The study included 25 fully breast-fed and 34
formula-fed infants from suburban communities in Sweden.
Intake among breast-fed infants was estimated using the test
weighing method over a 48-hour test period. Intake among
formula-fed infants was estimated by feeding infants from
bottles with known volumes of formula and recording the
amount consumed over a 48-hour period. Table 13-8
presents the mean breast milk and formula intake rates for
Page
13-4
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 13 - Breast Milk Intake
Table 13-8. Intake of Breast Milk and Formula
Age
(wks)
6
14
22
26
Source:
N
26
21
13
12
Kohleretal.
Breast Milk
Mean
(g/d)
746
726
722
689
1984.
SD
(g/d)
101
143
114
120
N
20
19
18
18
Mean
(g/d)
823
921
818
722
SD
(g/d)
111
95
201
209
N
13
13
13
12
Mean
(g/d)
792
942
861
776
SD
(g/d)
127
78
196
159
the infants studied. Data were collected for both cow's
milk-based formula and soy-based formula. The results
indicated that the daily intake for bottle-fed infants was
greater than for breast-fed infants.
The advantages of this study are that it compares breast
milk intake to formula intake and that test weightings were
conducted over 2 consecutive days to account for variability
in individual intake. Although the population studied was
not representative of the U.S. population, similar intake
rates were observed in the studies that were previously
summarized.
Axelsson et al. - Protein and Energy Intake During
Weaning - Axelsson et al. (1987) measured food
consumption and energy intake in 30 healthy Swedish
infants between the ages of 4 and 6 months. Both formula-
fed and breast-fed infants were studied. All infants were fed
supplemental foods (i.e., pureed fruits and vegetables after
4 months, and pureed meats and fish after 5 months). Milk
intake among breast-fed infants was estimated by weighing
the infants before and after each feeding over a 2-day period
at each sampling interval. Breast milk intake averaged 765
ml/day at 4.5 months of age, and 715 mL/day at 5.5 months
of age.
This study is based on short-term data, a small number
of infants, and may not be representative of the U.S.
population. However, the intake rates estimated by this
study are similar to those generated by the U.S. studies that
were summarized previously.
13.4. KEY STUDIES ON LIPID CONTENT AND
FAT INTAKE FROM BREAST MILK
Human milk contains over 200 constituents including
lipids, various proteins, carbohydrates, vitamins, minerals,
and trace elements as well as enzymes and hormones (NAS,
1991). The lipid content of breast milk varies according to
the length of time that an infant nurses. Lipid content
increases from the beginning to the end of a single nursing
session (NAS, 1991). The lipid portion accounts for
approximately 4 percent of human breast milk (39 ฑ 4.0
g/L) (NAS, 1991). This value is supported by various
studies that evaluated lipid content from human breast milk.
Several studies also estimated the quantity of lipid
consumed by breast-feeding infants. These values are
appropriate for performing exposure assessments for
nursing infants when the contaminant(s) have residue
concentrations that are indexed to the fat portion of human
breast milk.
Butte et al. - Human Milk Intake and Growth in
Exclusively Breast-fed Infants - Butte et al., (1984)
analyzed the lipid content of breast milk samples taken from
women who participated in a study of breast milk intake
among exclusively breast-fed infants. The study was
conducted with over 40 women during a 4-month period.
The mean lipid content of breast milk at various infants'
ages is presented in Table 13-9. The overall lipid content
for the 4-month study period was 34.3 ฑ 6.9 mg/g (3.4
percent). Butte et al. (1984) also calculated lipid intakes
from 24-hour breast milk intakes and the lipid content of the
human milk samples. Lipid intake was estimated to range
from 23.6 g/day (3.8 g/kg-day) to 28.0 g/day (5.9 g/kg-day).
The number of women included in this study was small,
and these women were selected primarily from middle- to
upper-socioeconomic classes. Thus, data on breast milk
lipid content from this study may not be entirely
representative of breast milk lipid content among the U.S.
population. Also, these estimates are based on short-term
data and day-to-day variability was not characterized.
Maxwell and Burmaster - Simulation Model for
Estimating a Distribution of Lipid Intake -Maxwell and
Burmaster (1993) used a hypothetical population of 5,000
infants between birth and 1 year of age to simulate a
distribution of daily lipid intake from breast milk. The
hypothetical population represented both bottle-fed and
breast-fed infants aged 1 to 365 days. A distribution of
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
13-5
-------
Volume II-Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 13- Breast Milk Intake
Table 13-9. Lipid Content of Human Milk and Estimated Lipid Intake
Age (months) Number
of
Observations
1
2
,1
4
37
40
37
41
Lipid Lipid
Content Content
(mg/g) ' (percent) b
36.2 ฑ 7.5 3.6
34.4 ฑ 6.8 3.4
32,2 ฑ7.8 3.2
34.8 ฑ10.8 35
.Lipid Lipid
Intake Intake
(g/day) " (g/kg-day)a
28.0 + 8.5 5.9 ฑ1.7
25.2 ฑ7.1 4.4 ฑ1.2
23.6 ฑ7.2 3.8 ฑ1.2
25 .6 ฑ8.6 3.8 + 1.3
* Data expressed as means ฑ standard deviation.
Percents calculated from lipid content reported in mg/g.
Source; Buttc. et al.. 1 984.
daily lipid intake was developed based on data in Dewey et
al. (1991b) on breast milk intake for infants at 3, 6, 9, and
12 months and breast milk lipid content, and survey data in
Ryan et al. (1991) on the percentage of breast-fed infants
under the age of 12 months (i.e., approximately 22 percent).
A model was used to simulate intake among 1,113 of the
5,000 infants that were expected to be breast-fed. The
results of the model indicated that lipid intake among
nursing infants under 12 months of age can be characterized
by a normal distribution with a mean of 26.8 g/day and a
standard deviation of 7.4 g/day (Table 13-10). The model
assumes that nursing infants are completely breast-fed and
does not account for infants who are breast-fed longer than
1 year. Based on data collected by Dewey etal. (1991 b),
Maxwell and Burmaster (1993) estimated the lipid content
of breast milk to be 36.7 g/L at 3 months (35.6 mg/g or
3.9%) and 40.2 g/L (39.0 mg/g or 3.9%) at 12 months.
Table 13-10. Predicted Lipid Intakes for Breast-fed Infants
Under 12 Months of Age
Statistic
Number of Observations in Simulation
Minimum I.ipid Intake
Maximum I.ipkl Intake
Aridunclic Mean Lipid Intake
Standard Deviation Lipid Intake
Source; Maxwell and Burmaster. 1993.
Value
1,113
1.0 g/day
51.5 g/day
26.8 g/day
7.4 s/dav
The advantage of this study is that it provides a
"snapshot" of daily lipid intake from breast milk for breast-
fed infants. These results are, however, based on a
simulation model and there are uncertainties associated with
the assumptions made. The estimated mean lipid intake rate
represents the average daily intake for nursing infants under
12 months of age. These data are useful for performing
exposure assessments when the age of the infant cannot be
specified (i.e., 3 months or 6 months). Also, because intake
rates are indexed to the lipid portion of the breast milk, they
may be used .in conjunction with residue concentrations
indexed to fat content.
13.5. OTHER FACTORS
Other factors associated with breast milk intake
include: the energy intake from breast-feeding, the
frequency of breast-feeding sessions per day, the duration of
breast-feeding per event, the duration of breast-feeding
during childhood, and the magnitude and nature of the
population that breast-feeds.
Energy Intake and Energy Content of Breast Milk and
Infant Formula - Several studies have estimated energy
intakes among breast-feeding infants; therefore, based on
the energy content of breast milk, intake rates can be
calculated. The Food and Agriculture Organization/World
Health Organization (FAO/WHO) recommends infant
energy intakes of 116 kcal/kg/day for the first 3 months of
life and 99 kcal/kg/day between the ages of 3 to 6 months
(Butte et al., 1990). Similarly, the Food and Nutrition
Board's Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) for
energy intake is 115 kcal/kg/day during the first 6 months
of life (Montandon et al., 1986; Butte et al., 1984), and
USDA's Nutrition Research Board recommends 115
kcal/kg/day at birth and 105 kcal/kg/day by the end of the
first year (Butte et al., 1990). However, Butte et al. (1984)
observed energy intakes that were substantially less than the
recommended values among healthy, well nourished,
exclusively breast-fed infants (110 ฑ 24 kcal/kg-day at 1
month and 71 ฑ 17 kcal/kg/day at 4 months). In another
study, Kohler et al. (1984) observed that energy intake for
healthy breast-fed infants was lower than for healthy
formula-fed infants (Table 13-11). According to Whitehead
and Paul (1991), recent studies indicate that the energy
Page
13-6
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 13 - Breast Milk Intake
Age
(wks)
6
14
22
26
Source:
Number of
Infants
26
21
13
12
Kohlereta!.. 1984.
Table
Breast-fed
Mean
(kcal/day)
525
595
638
663
3-11. Total Energy Intake
SD
(kcal/day)
71
100
98
85 '
Number of '
33
32
31
30
Formula-ted
Mean
(kcal/day)
594
715
699
695
SD
(kcal/day)
131
108
141
124
intake from formula averages about 90 kcal/kg-day and
energy intake from breast milk averages about 85 kcal/kg-
day. Based on several of these studies, Whitehead and Paul
(1991) estimated the energy intake among exclusively
breast-fed infants to be 114, 98, 92, and 86 kcal/kg-day at
1, 2, 3 and 4 months of age, respectively. Dewey and
Lonnerdal (1983) estimated the energy intake from breast
milk to be 113, 105,93,93,85, and 89 kcal/kg-day (509,
564,556,596,593, and 658 kcal/day) for infants 1, 2, 3,4,
5, and 6 months of age, respectively. Table 13-12 presents
energy intakes estimated by Dewey et al. (1991b) in a
subsequent study. Using an assumed energy content of 65
kcal/mL for breast milk and measured breast milk intake
rates, Axelsson et al. (1987) estimated energy intake among
breast-fed infants to be 82.2ฑ9.1 kcal/kg-day at 4 to 5
months of age and 76.9ฑ9.4 kcal/kg-day at 5 to 6 months of
age. Energy intake among bottle-fed infants was slightly
higher. Bottle-fed infants consuming formula with an
energy content of 72 kcal/mL had energy intakes of
104.3ฑ12.4 kcal/kg-day at 4 to 5 months and 97.3+11.1
kcal/kg-day at 5 to 6 months. Bottle-fed infants consuming
formula with an energy content of 69 kcal/rnL had energy
intakes of 95.6ฑ13.2 kcal/kg-day at 4 to 5 months and
92.6ฑ 15.0 kcal/kg-day at 5 to 6 months.
Prentice et al. (1988) estimated the energy
requirements of 355 healthy children, ages 0 to 3 years of
age, by using data on energy expenditure instead of energy
intake. Data on measurements of energy expenditure using
the doubly-labeled water method 2H2I8O from the published
literature were used. This method measures total energy
expenditure by following the disappearance of stable
isotopes taken as an oral dose. The energy requirements
estimated by Prentice et al. (1988) are 110, 95, 85, 83, 83,
84, and 85 kcal/kg-day at 1,3 ,6,9,12, 24, and 36 months,
respectively.
Table 13-12. Energy Intake from Human Milk
Age
(months)
Number of
Observations
Energy Intake
kcal/day a
Energy Intake
kcal/kg-day'
3
6
9
12
71
56
46
40
569
(86)
549
(120)
466
(152)
322
(181)
91.4
(11.7)
71.6
(15.2)
54.3
(17.3)
34.7
(19.9)
ฐ Expressed as means with standard deviation in parentheses.
Source: Dewey et al., 1991b.
Dewey and Lonnerdal (1983) estimated the energy
content in human milk samples at 1 to 6 months post
partum based on analyses of fat, protein, and lactose
content. Mean energy content averaged 74 to 79 kcal/mL.
Dewey etal. (1991a) estimated that at 3 months the average
energy content of breast milk is 72.8 ฑ 9.5 kcal/mL.
Whitehead and Paul (1991) and Axelsson et al. (1987)
assumed a breast milk energy content of 65 kcal/mL in their
studies of the energy intake among breast-fed infants, and
Kohler et al. (1984) estimated the energy contents of cow's
milk-based and soy-based infant formulas to be 67 kcal/mL.
Frequency and Duration of Feeding - Hofvander et al.
(1982) reported on the frequency of feeding among 25
bottle-fed and 25 breast-fed infants at ages 1, 2, and 3
months. The mean number of meals for these age groups
was approximately 5 meals/day (Table 13-13). Neville et
al. (1988) reported slightly higher mean feeding
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
13-7
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 13 - Breast Milk Intake
frequencies. The mean number of meals per day for
exclusively breast-fed infants was 7.3 at ages 2 to 5 months
and 8.2 at ages 2 weeks to 1 month. Neville et al. (1988)
reported lhat for infants between the ages of 1 week and 5
months Ihe average duration of a breast feeding session is
16-18 minutes.
Table 13-13. Number of Meals Per Day
Age (months)
1
2
3
Bottle-fed Infants
(meals/day) *
5.4 (4-7)
4.8 (4-6)
4.7 (3-6)
Breast-fed
(meals/day) "
5.8(5-7)
5.3 (5-7)
5.1 (4-8)
* Data expressed as mean with range in parentheses.
Source: Hofvander et al., 1982.
Population of Nursing Infants and Duration of
Breast-Feeding During Infancy - According to NAS
(1991), the percentage of breast-feeding women has
changed dramatically over the years. Between 1936 and
1940, approximately 77 percent of infants were breast fed,
but the incidence of breast-feeding fell to approximately 22
percent in 1972. The duration of breast-feeding also
dropped from about 4 months in the early 1930s to 2
months in the late 1950s. After 1972, the incidence of
breast-feeding began to rise again, reaching its peak at
approximately 61 percent in 1982. The duration of
breast-feeding also increased between 1972 and 1982.
Approximately 10 percent of the mothers who initiated
breast-feeding continued for at least 3 months in 1972;
however, in 1984, 37 percent continued breast-feeding
beyond 3 months. In 1989, breast-feeding was initiated
among 52.2 percent of newborn infants, and 40 percent
continued for 3 months or longer (NAS, 1991). Based on
the data for 1989. only about 20 percent of infants were still
breast fed by age 5 to 6 months (NAS, 1991). Data on the
actual length of time that infants continue to breast-feed
beyond 5 or 6 months are limited (NAS, 1991). However,
Maxwell and Burmaster (1993) estimated that
approximately 22 percent of infants under 1 year of age are
breast-fed. This estimate is based on a reanalysis of survey
data in Ryan et al. (1991) collected by Ross Laboratories
(Maxwell and Burmaster, 1993). Studies have also
indicated that breast-feeding practices may differ among
clhnic and socioeconomic groups and among regions of the
United Slates. The percentages of mothers who breast feed.
based on ethnic background and demographic variables, are
presented in Table 13-14 (NAS, 1991).
Intake Rates Based on Nutritional Status - Information
on differences in the quality and quantity of breast milk
consumed based on ethnic or socioeconomic characteristics
of the population is limited. Lonnerdal et al. (1976) studied
breast milk volume and composition (nitrogen, lactose,
proteins) among underprivileged and privileged Ethiopian
mothers. No significant differences were observed between
the data for these two groups; and similar data for well-
nourished Swedish mothers were observed. Lonnerdal et
al. (1976) stated that these results indicate that breast milk
quality and quantity are not affected by maternal
malnutrition. However, Brown et al. (1986a; 1986b) noted
that the lactational capacity and energy concentration of
marginally-nourished women in Bangladesh were "modestly
less than in better nourished mothers." Breast milk intake
rates for infants of marginally-nourished women in this
study were 690ฑ122 g/day at 3 months, 722ฑ105 g/day at
6 months, and 719ฑ119 g/day at 9 months of age (Brown et
al., 198$a). Brown et al. (1986a) observed that breast milk
from women with larger measurements of arm
circumference and triceps skinfold thickness had higher
concentrations of fat and energy than mothers with less body
fat Positive correlations between maternal weight and milk
fat concentrations were also observed. These results
suggest that milk composition may be affected by maternal
nutritional status.
13.6. RECOMMENDATIONS
The key studies described in this section were used in
selecting recommended values for breast milk intake, fat
content and fat intake, and other related factors. Although
different survey designs, testing periods, and populations
were utilized by the key and relevant studies to estimate
intake, the mean and standard deviation estimates reported
in these studies are relatively consistent. The general
designs of both key and relevant studies and their limitations
are summarized in Table 13-15. Table 13-16 presents the
confidence rating for breast milk intake recommendations.
Breast Milk Intake - The breast milk intake rates for
nursing infants that have been reported in the key studies
described in this section are summarized in Table 13-17.
Based on the combined results of these studies, 742 mL/day
is recommended to represent an average breast milk intake
rate, and 1,033 mL/day represents an upper-percentile
intake rate (based on the middle range of the mean plus 2
Page
13-8
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 13 - Breast Milk Intake
Table 13-14. Percentage of Mothers Breast- feeding Newborn Infants in the Hospital and Infants at 5 or 6 Montlis
of Age in the United States in 1989", by Ethnic Background and Selected Demographic Variables*
Total White ' Black
Category Newborns 5-6 Mo Newboms 5-6 Mo Newborns 5-6 Mo
Infants Infants Infants
All mothers 52.2 19.6 58.5 22.7 . 23.0 7.0
Parity
Primiparous 52.6 16.6 58.3 18.9 23.1 5.9
Multiparous 51.7 22.7 58.7 26,8, 23.0 7.9
Marital status
Married 59.8 24.0 61.9 25.3 35.8 12.3
Unmarried 30.8 7.7 40.3 9.8 17.2 4.6
Maternal age
<20yr 30.2 6.2 36.8 7.2 13.5 3.6
20-24 yr 45.2 12.7 50.8 14.5 19.4 4.7
25-29 yr 58.8 22.9 63.1 25.0 29.9 9.4
30-34 yr 65.5 31.4 70.1 34.8 35.4 13.6
j35yr 66.5 36.2 71.9 40.5 35.6 14.3
Maternal education
No college 42.1 13.4 48.3 15.6 17.6 5.5
College" 70.7 31.1 74.7 34.1 41.1 12.2
Family income
<$7,000 28.8 7.9 36.7 9.4' 14.5 4.3
$7,000414,999 44.0 13.5 49.0 15.2 23.5 . 7.3
$15,000-$24,999 54.7 20.4 57.7 22.3 31.7 8.7
a$25,000 66.3 27.6 67.8 28.7 42.8 14.5
Maternal employment
Fulltime 50.8 10.2 54.8 10.8 30.6 6.9
Part time 59.4 23.0 63.8 25.5 26.0 6.6
Not employed 51.0 23.1 58.7 27.5 19.3 7.2
U.S. census region
New England 52.2 20.3 53.2 21.4 35.6 5.0
Middle Atlantic 47.4 18.4 52.4 21.8 30.6 9.7
East North Central 47.6 18.1 53.2 20.7 21.0 7.2
West North Central 55.9 19.9 58.2 20.7 27.7 7.9
South Atlantic 43.8 14.8 53.8 18.7 19.6 5.7
East South Central 37.9 12.4 45.1 15.0 14.2 3.7
West South Central . 46.0 14.7 56.2 18.4 14.5 3.8
Mountain 70.2 30.4 74.9 33.0 31.5 11.0
Pacific 70.3 28.7 76.7 33.4 43.9 15.0
a Mothers were surveyed when their infants were 6 months of age. They were asked
Hispanic0
Newborns 5-6 Mo
Infants
48.4 15.0
49.9 13.2
47.2 16.5
55.3 18.8
37.5 8.6
35.3 6.9
46.9 12.6
56.2 19.5
57.6 23.4
53.9 24.4
42.6 12.2
66.5 23.4
35.3 10.3
47.2 13.0
52.6 16.5
65.4 23.0
50.4 9.5
59.4 17.7
46.0 16.7
47.6 14.9
41.4 10.8
46.2 12.6
50.8 22.8
48.0 13.8
23.5 5.0
39.2 11.4
53.9 18.2
58.5 19.7
to recall the method of
feeding the infant when in the hospital, at age 1 week, at months 1 through 5, and on the day preceding
completion of the survey. Numbers in the columns labeled "5-6 Mo Infants" are an average of the 5-
month and previous day responses.
b Based on data from Ross Laboratories.
0 Hispanic is not exclusive of white or black.
d College includes all women who reported completing at least 1 year of college.
Source: NAS, 1991.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
13-9
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 13 ~ Breast Milk Intake
standard deviations) for infants between the ages of 1 and 6
months of age. This value is the mean of the average
intakes at 1,3, and 6 months from the key studies listed in
Table 13-17. It is consistent with the average intake rate of
718 to 777 ml/day estimated by NAS (1991) for infants
during the first 4 to 5 months of life. Intake among older
infants is somewhat lower, averaging 413 mL/day for
12-month olds (Neville et al. 1988; Dewey et al. 1991;
1991 b). When a time weighted average is calculated for the
12-month period, average breast milk intake is
approximately 688 mL/day, arid upper-percentile intake is
approximately 980 mL/day. Table 13-18 summarizes these
recommended intake rates.
Lipid Content and Lipid Intake - Recommended Hpid
intake rates are based on data from Butte et al. (1984) and
Maxwell and Burmaster (1993). Butte et al. (1984)
estimated that average Hpid intake ranges from 23.6 ฑ 7.2
g/day (22.9 ฑ 7.0 mL/day) to 28.0 ฑ 8.5 g/day (27.2 ฑ 8.3
mL/day) between I and 4 months of age. These intake rates
are consistent with those observed by Burmaster and
Maxwell (1993) for infants under 1 year of age [(26.8 ฑ7.4
g/day (26.0 ฑ 7.2 mL/day)]. Therefore, the recommended
breast milk lipid intake rate for infants under 1 year of age
is 26.0 mL/day and the upper-percentile value is 40.4
mL/day (based on the mean plus 2 standard deviations).
The recommended value for breast milk fat content is 4.0
percent based on data from NAS (1991), Butte et al.
(1984), and Maxwell and Burmaster (1993).
13.7 REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 13
Axclsson, I.; Borulf, S.; Righard, L.; Raiha, N. (1987)
Protein and energy intake during weaning: effects
and growth. Acta Paediatr. Scand. 76:321-327.
Brown, K.H.; Akhtar, N.A.; Robertson, A.D.; Ahmed,
M.G. (1986a) Lactational capacity of marginally
nourished mothers: relationships between maternal
nutritional status and quantity and proximate
composition of milk. Pediatrics. 78:909-919.
Brown, K.H.; Robertson, A.D.; Akhtar, N.A. (1986b)
Lactational capacity of marginally nourished
mothers: infants' milk nutrient consumption and
patterns of growth. Pediatrics. 78:920-927.
Butte, N.F.; Garza, C.; Smith, E.G.; Nichols, B.L. (1984)
Human milk intake and growth in exclusively breast-
fed infants. Journal of Pediatrics. 104:187-195.
Butte, N.K; Wong, W.W.; Gar/.a, C; Klein, P.O. (1990)
Adequacy of human milk for meeting energy
requirements during early infancy. In: Atkinson,
S.A.; Hanson, L.A.; Chandra, R.K., eds.
Breastfeeding, nutrition, infection and infant growth
in developed and emerging countries.. ARTS
Biomedical Publ., Newfoundland, Canada.
Dewey, K.G.; Lonnerdal, B. (1983) Milk and nutrient
intake of breast-fed infants from 1 to 6
months:relation to growth and fatness. Journal of
Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition. 2:497-
506.
Dewey, K.G.; Heinig, J.; Nornmsen, L.A.; Lonnerdal, B.
(199la) Maternal versus infant factors related to
breast milk intake and residual volume: the
DARLING study. Pediatrics. 87:829-837.
Dewey, K.G.; Heinig, J.; Nommsen, L.; Lo'nnerdal, B.
(1991 b) Adequacy of energy intake among breast-
fed infants in the DARLING study: relationships to
growth, velocity, morbidity, and activity levels. The
Journal of Pediatrics. 119:538-547.
Hofvander, Y.; Hagman, U.; Hillervik, C.; Sjolin, S.
(1982) The amount of milk consumed by 1 -3
months old breast- or bottle-fed infants. Acta
Paediatr. Scand. 71:953-958.
Kb'hler, L.; Meeuwisse, G.; Mortensson, W. (1984)
Food intake and growth of infants between six and
twenty-six weeks of age on breast milk, cow's milk
formula, and soy formula. Acta Paediatr. Scand.
73:40-48.
Lonnerdal, B.; Forsum, E.; Gebre-Medhim, M.;
Hpmbraes, L. (1976) Breast milk composition in
Ethiopian and Swedish mothers: lactose, nitrogen,
and protein contents. The American Journal of
Clinical Nutrition. 29:1134-1141.
Maxwell, N.I.; Burmaster, D.E. (1993) A simulation
model to estimate a distribution of lipid intake from
breast milk during the first year of life. Journal of
Exposure Analysis and Environmental
Epidemiology. 3:383-406.
Montandon, C.M.; Wills, C.; Garza, C.; Smith, E.O.;
Nichols, B.L. (1986) Formula intake of 1- and 4-
month-old infants. Journal of Pediatric
Gastroenterology and Nutrition. 5:434-438.
National Academy of Sciences (NAS). (1991) Nutrition
during lactation. Washington, DC National
Academy Press.
Neville, M.C.; Keller, R.; Seacat, J.; Lutes, V.; Neifert,
M.: etal. (1988) Studies in human lactation: milk
volumes in lactating women during the onset of
lactation and full lactation. American Journal of
Clinical Nutrition. 48:1375-1386.
Page
13-10
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 13 - Breast Milk Intake
Pao, E.M.; Mines, J.M.; Roche, A.F. (1980) Milk
intakes and feeding patterns of breast-fed infants.
Journal of the American Dietetic Association.
77:540-545.
Prentice, A.M.; Lucas, A.; Vasquez-Velasquez, L.;
Davies, P.S.; Whitehead, R.G. (1988) Are current
dietary guidelines for young children a prescription
for over feeding? Lancet. 1988:1066-1068.
Ryan, A.S.; Rush, D.; Krieger, F.W.; Lewandowski, G.E.
(1991) Recent declines in breastfeeding in the
United States, 1984-1989. Pediatrics. 88:719-727.
Whitehead, R.G.; Paul, A.A. (1991) Dietary energy
needs from 6 to 12 months of age. In: Heird, W.C.
ed., Nutritional Needs of the Six to Twelve Month
Old Infant. New York, Raven Press Ltd. pp. 135-
148.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
13-11
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion factors
Chapter 13 > Breast Milk Intake
&
&
= o a
A -8 <-
o So ซ
Jll
W i .1
I
D
CO
3? ra
Is
S3
o\
If
U !ง
^ oo
Is
Page
13-12
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 13 - Breast Milk Intake
u
.1
a
s>
I
Mซ>
1L
ij.o
s
1
i-a
w a io"
if.
s
lo
^'i l"=s^gs 2--svS>
.1.1 ui<2,2J3! K IS 8.
1|
o 1 2 -g
f'Sfl 1
s
ซ
S.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August
-
'
<
g
<
2
8
-
s % s !s ซ -1 1 *
ll'll ll^l
"I
.1
i
"3
a
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 13 - Breast Milk Intake
Table 13-16. Confidence in Breast Milk Intake Recommendations
Considerations
Study Elements
Level of peer review
Accessibility
Rcproducibility
Focus on factor of interest
Data pertinent to U.S.
Primary data
Currency
Adequacy of data collection period
Validity of approach
Study size
Representativeness of the population
Characterization of variability
Lack of bias in study design (high
rating is desirable)
Measurement error
Other Elements
Number of studies
Agreement between researchers
Overall Rating
Rationale Rating
AH key studies are from peer review literature High
Papers are widely available from peer review journals High
Methodology used was clearly presented High
The focus of the studies was on estimating breast milk intake High
Subpopulations of the U.S. were the focus of all the key studies High
All the studies were based on primary data High
Studies were conducted between 1980-1986. Although incidence of breast Medium
feeding may change with time, breast milk intake among breastfed infants
may not.
Infants were not studied long enough to fully characterize day to day Medium
variability.
Methodology uses changes in body weight as a surrogate for total Medium
ingestion. This is the best methodology there is to estimate breast milk
ingeslion. Mothers were instructed in the use of infant scales to minimize
measurement errors. Three out of the 5 studies corrected data for
insensible water loss.
The sample sizes used in the key studies were fairly small (range 13-73).
Population is not representative of the U.S.; only mid-upper class, well Low
nourished mothers were studied. Socioeconomic factors may affect the
incidence of breastfeeding. Mother's nourishment may affect milk
production.
Not very well characterized Low
Bias in the studies was not characterized; Three out of 5 studies corrected Low
for insensible water loss; Not correcting for insensible water loss may
underestimate intake; Mothers selected for the studies were volunteers;
therefore response rate does not apply; population studied may introduce
some bias in the results (see above)
All mothers were well educated and trained in the use of the scale which Medium
helped minimize measurement error.
There are 5 key studies High
Tliere is good agreement among researchers High
Studies were well designed; results were consistent; sample size was fairly Medium
low and not representative of U.S. population or population of nursing
mothers; variability cannot be characterized due to limitations in data
collection period.
Page
13-14
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 13 - Breast Milk Intake
. Table 13-17. Breast Milk Intake Rates Derived From Key Studies
Mean (mL/day)
Age: 1 Month
600
729
747
673
weighted avg = 702
Age: 3 Months \ .
833
702
712
782
788
weighted avg = 759
Age: 6 Months
682
744
896
747
weighted avg = 765
Age: 9 Months
600
627
avg = 622
Age: 12 Months
391
435
weighted avg = 427
12-MONTH TIME WEIGHTED AVERAGE
688
N'-
11
37
13
16
2
37
12
16
73
1
13
11
60
12
50
9
42
Upper Percentile (mL/day)
(mean plus 2 standard
deviations)
918
981
1,095
1,057 "
1,007ซ
923
934
1,126
1,046
1,025'
978
1,140
1,079
1.059"
1,027
1,049
1,038
877
923
900
Range 900-1,059
(middle of the range 980)
Reference
Paoetal., 1980
Butte et al., 1984
Neville etal., 1988
Dewey and Lonnerdal,
Paoetal.. 19X0
Uuttectal., 1984
Neville et al., 1988
Dewey and Lonnerdal,
Dewey et al., 1991b
Paoetal., 1980
Neville et al., 1988
Dewey and Lonnerdal,
Dewey etal., 1991b
Neville et al., 1988
Dewey et al., 1991b
1983
1983
1983
Neville etal., 1988
Dewey et al., 1991a; 1991b
,
* Middle of the range.
Exposure Factors Handbook
August 1996
Page
13-15
-------
Volume II - Food Ingestion Factors
Chapter 13ซBreast Milk Intake
Table 13-18. Summary of Recommended Breast Milk and Lipjd Intake Rates
Age
Breask Milk
1-6 Months
12 Month Average
LJpMj1'
------- |