Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42121472›Full record

ArticleFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2026

Glutamate: Safe and Adequate Intake Levels for Infants-

Anita Hartog, Hans Verhagen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Anita HartogFood for Health Consultancy, 6986BK Angerlo, The Netherlands.
Hans VerhagenFood Safety & Nutrition Consultancy, 3703EE Zeist, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7952-3530

Funding

European Committee for Umami FSN-QUO-2026-01-19 ECU
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Toxicological risk assessment of food ingredients has traditionally relied on identifying a no-observed-adverse-effect level (NOAEL) or benchmark dose (BMD), followed by the application of default uncertainty factors (UFs) to derive health-based guidance values (HBGVs) such as the acceptable daily intake (ADI). While effective for conventional food additives, this approach may be inappropriate for nutrients and intrinsic food components with established physiological functions. This paper critically explores these limitations using free glutamate as a central example, alongside additional cases relevant to infant nutrition, including vitamin C, iodine, and human milk oligosaccharides (HMOs). Data on free glutamate in human milk show that breastfed infants habitually ingest amounts far exceeding additive-based ADIs without adverse effects, underscoring the limitations of applying default uncertainty factors and classical toxicological paradigms to endogenous nutrients. Comparable considerations apply to protein hydrolysates and amino acid-based infant formulas evaluated by EFSA, where growth, tolerance, and compositional suitability are integral to safety assessment. Overall, nutrient safety evaluation requires an integrative, physiology-informed framework that incorporates realistic exposure, developmental stage, and metabolic competence. Breast milk provides a biologically relevant reference, supporting a proportionate and science-based application of toxicological principles in infant nutrition.

Indexed as

acceptable daily intakebenefitsbreast milkcontext-driven toxicological risk assessmentglutamatehealth-based guidance valueshuman milk oligosaccharidesiodinerisksvitamin C

Identifiers

PMID42121472
PMCPMC13163406

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.