Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ EFSA Journalarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
EFSA Journal
Article . 2012 . Peer-reviewed
Data sources: Crossref
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
EFSA Journal
Article
License: CC BY ND
Data sources: UnpayWall
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
EFSA Journal
Article . 2012
Data sources: DOAJ
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Scientific Opinion on the Tolerable Upper Intake Level of calcium

Authors: EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies;

Scientific Opinion on the Tolerable Upper Intake Level of calcium

Abstract

Abstract Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies was asked to re‐evaluate the safety in use of calcium. The Panel was requested to consider if the Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL) for calcium established by the SCF in 2003 (2,500 mg/day for adults, including pregnant and lactating women), which was based on different intervention studies of long duration in which total daily calcium intakes of 2,500 mg from both diet and supplements were tolerated without adverse effects, needed to be changed on the basis of new available evidence. A number of placebo controlled human intervention studies in adults published since then also showed that total daily calcium intakes of 2,500 mg from both diet and supplements are tolerated without adverse effects. The Panel considers that no relationship has been established between long‐term calcium intakes from diet and supplements and increased risk of nephrolithiasis, cardiovascular disease or prostate cancer. No new data have become available which would require a revision of the UL for calcium for adults, including pregnant and lactating women, of 2,500 mg. No new data have become available which would allow the setting of a UL for infants, children or adolescents. Data from European populations indicate that intakes of calcium in high consumers among adult males can be close to the UL. Although available data do not allow the setting of a UL for infants, children or adolescents, no risk has been identified with highest current levels of calcium intake in these age groups.

Keywords

safety, Nutrition. Foods and food supply, UL, Chemical technology, hypercalcaemia, TP1-1185, supplements, Calcium, TX341-641, hypercalciuria

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    34
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
34
Top 10%
Top 10%
Average
gold