Tolerable Upper Intake Level for Individual Amino Acids in Humans: A Narrative Review of Recent Clinical Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Individual amino acids are widely popular as supplements because of various perceived and real health benefits. However, currently, there are no recommendations set by national health agencies for tolerable upper intake levels (UL) for amino acids because of a lack of well-conducted human dose-response trials. In the past decade, under the initiative of the International Council on Amino Acid Science, a nonprofit organization, a series of UL human clinical studies were conducted. The goal of this narrative review is to summarize the studies on 6 essential amino acids (leucine, tryptophan, methionine, lysine, histidine, and phenylalanine), 2 nonessential amino acids (arginine and serine), and 2 nonproteinogenic amino acids (ornithine and citrulline) and provide the first set of ULs. A brief background of the concept of the DRI framework of UL, the concept of UL for amino acids, and a perspective of the results are also provided. The data suggest that in relatively healthy adult individuals, the tested amino acids are well tolerated, and ULs, or the no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL), lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL), can be determined. The ULs were for leucine-young (35 g/d), tryptophan (4.5 g/d), and leucine-elderly (30 g/d); NOAEL and LOAEL for methionine at 3.2 and 6.4 g/d, respectively; NOAEL for arginine (30 g/d); NOAEL and LOAEL for lysine at 6 and 7.5 g/d, respectively; NOAEL and LOAEL for histidine at 8 and 12 g/d, respectively; and NOAEL for phenylalanine (12 g/d), serine (12 g/d), ornithine (12 g/d) and citrulline (24 g/d). This first set of human UL data are hoped to help national and international agencies set safety standards for supplemental amino acids.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".