Okrotoxin has been described as toxic to the immune system, developing fetus, kidneys,

and nervous system as well as being carcinogenic.

But that's in animal studies.

Okrotoxin causes kidney toxicity in certain animal species, but there's little documented

evidence of adverse effects in humans. That's why it's only considered a possible

human carcinogen. Big Ag assures that current okrotoxin levels are safe, even among those who

eat a lot of contaminated foods, the worst-case

scenario, maybe young children eating a lot of oat-based cereals. But even then, their lifetime

cancer risk is considered negligible, with those arguing against regulatory standards suggesting

you can eat more than 42 cups of oatmeal a day and not worry about it.

Where do they get these kinds of estimates?

They determine the so-called benchmark dose in animals,

the dose of the toxin that gives a 10% increase in pathology,

and then because you want to err on the side of caution, you divide that dose by 500 as a kind of safety fudge factor

to develop the tolerable daily intake.

For cancer risk, you can find the tumor dose, the dose that increases tumor incidence in

lab animals by 5%, and extrapolate down to the negligible cancer risk intake, effectively

incorporating a 5,000-fold safety factor.

Seems kind of arbitrary, right?

But what else you're going to do?

I mean, you can't just intentionally feed people the stuff and see what happens,

though, hey, look, people eat it all the time.

...