Drug Doses Converge while Environmental and Occupational Thresholds Diverge: A Biological Paradox

High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide The human body processes therapeutic drugs and environmental chemicals through the same biological systems, yet their regulatory treatment differs markedly. For most medicines, a single approved dose is applied across major jurisdictions, supported by internationally harmonized clinical trial requirements through the International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH). In contrast, health-based reference values for environmental and occupational chemicals─including reference doses, tolerable daily intakes, biomonitoring guidance values, and occupational exposure limits─often differ by one to several orders of magnitude across countries, despite relying on largely shared toxicological evidence. This review examines the scientific and institutional reasons for this divergence. The mechanisms governing absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion (ADME) are conserved across human populations, and pharmacogenomic exceptions are typically managed through individual clinical decisions rather than country-specific dosing frameworks. In environmental and occupational risk assessment, divergence arises partly from legitimate scientific uncertainty associated with chronic low-dose exposure, mixture effects, developmental susceptibility, and frequent reliance on animal data rather than prospective human trials. It is also strongly shaped by institutional history, regulatory sovereignty, and policy choices regarding precaution and acceptable risk. National biomonitoring programs often generate overlapping exposure datasets for the same compounds, while the thresholds used for their interpretation remain jurisdiction-specific. Converging methodological tools─including physiologically based pharmacokinetic and toxicokinetic modeling, in vitro-to-in vivo extrapolation, adverse outcome pathways, and biomonitoring equivalents─provide a shared scientific infrastructure for more harmonized and biologically grounded reference values. Their systematic application across pharmacology and toxicology offers the most practical path toward consistent human health protection across jurisdictions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Environment & Health
Published
2026-07-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1021/envhealth.6c00263
Primary Topic
Effects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Drug Doses Converge while Environmental and Occupational Thresholds Diverge: A Biological Paradox

Gabriele Sabbioni
Environment & Health
Effects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals
article

Drug Doses Converge while Environmental and Occupational Thresholds Diverge: A Biological Paradox

Gabriele Sabbioni
article en

Abstract

High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide The human body processes therapeutic drugs and environmental chemicals through the same biological systems, yet their regulatory treatment differs markedly. For most medicines, a single approved dose is applied across major jurisdictions, supported by internationally harmonized clinical trial requirements through the International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH). In contrast, health-based reference values for environmental and occupational chemicals─including reference doses, tolerable daily intakes, biomonitoring guidance values, and occupational exposure limits─often differ by one to several orders of magnitude across countries, despite relying on largely shared toxicological evidence. This review examines the scientific and institutional reasons for this divergence. The mechanisms governing absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion (ADME) are conserved across human populations, and pharmacogenomic exceptions are typically managed through individual clinical decisions rather than country-specific dosing frameworks. In environmental and occupational risk assessment, divergence arises partly from legitimate scientific uncertainty associated with chronic low-dose exposure, mixture effects, developmental susceptibility, and frequent reliance on animal data rather than prospective human trials. It is also strongly shaped by institutional history, regulatory sovereignty, and policy choices regarding precaution and acceptable risk. National biomonitoring programs often generate overlapping exposure datasets for the same compounds, while the thresholds used for their interpretation remain jurisdiction-specific. Converging methodological tools─including physiologically based pharmacokinetic and toxicokinetic modeling, in vitro-to-in vivo extrapolation, adverse outcome pathways, and biomonitoring equivalents─provide a shared scientific infrastructure for more harmonized and biologically grounded reference values. Their systematic application across pharmacology and toxicology offers the most practical path toward consistent human health protection across jurisdictions.

Environment & Health
Office of Technology Transfer (US), Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (US), Università della Svizzera italiana (CH), Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
Staatssekretariat für Bildung, Forschung und Innovation
Industry, innovation and infrastructure
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Effects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.