• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.22 no.7
• /
• pp.663-669
• /
• 2022

The content of fluoride in toothpaste commercially available in Korea has been increased to less than 1500 ppm. The purpose is to provide these results to consumers and to suggest alternatives to the safe use of toothpaste. This study was conducted on 1,300 people for 2 weeks from March 2021. As a research tool, general characteristics and oral health behaviors were surveyed. ConsExpo Web 1.0.2. It was used as an input variable for exposure evaluation. As a result of the study, when a toothpaste containing 1500 ppm of fluoride was used, the external dose on day of exposure was 2.3×10-2 mg/kg/day for males, 2.9×10-2 mg/kg/day for females, and children aged 2-3 years was estimated to be 7.3×10 -2 mg/kg/day. As a result of this study, it is thought that as the fluoride content of toothpaste distributed in the market increases, it will be used as a basic data to present standards for safe use by consumers.

• Journal of Environmental Health Sciences
• /
• v.50 no.1
• /
• pp.43-53
• /
• 2024

Background: Exposure assessment is an important part of risk assessment for consumer products. Exposure models are used when estimating consumer exposures by considering exposure routes, subjects, and circumstances. These models differ based on their tiers, types, and target populations. Consequently, exposure estimates may vary between models. Objectives: This study aimed to compare the results of different exposure models using identical exposure factors. Methods: Chemical exposure from consumer products was calculated using four consumer exposure assessment models: Targeted Risk Assessment 3.1, Consumer Exposure Model 2.1 (CEM), ConsExpo web 1.1.1, and the Korean Exposure Algorithm (primary and detailed) issued by the Ministry of Environment, No. 972 (MOE). The same exposure factors were used in each model to calculate inhalation and dermal exposures to acetaldehyde, d-limonene, and naphthalene in all-purpose cleaners, leather coating sprays, and sealants. Results: In the results, TRA provided the highest estimate. Generally, MOE (detailed), CEM and ConsExpo showed lower exposures. The inhalation exposure for leather coating spray showed the largest differences between models, with differences reaching up to 1.2×10⁷ times. Since identical inputs were used for the calculations, it is likely that the models significantly influenced the estimated results. Conclusions: Despite using the same exposure factors to calculate dermal and inhalation exposures, the results varied substantially based on the model's exposure algorithm. Therefore, selecting an exposure model for assessing consumer products should be done with careful consideration.