tag:theconversation.com,2011:/us/topics/phthalates-100746/articlesPhthalates – The Conversation2024-01-26T18:08:46Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2209302024-01-26T18:08:46Z2024-01-26T18:08:46ZCertain indoor air pollutants can be absorbed through the skin – here’s what you need to know<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/571636/original/file-20240126-19-jax70v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=20%2C6%2C4473%2C2485&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Phthalates are one of these pollutants that our skin can absorb.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/skin-cell-closeup-oli-vitamin-drop-2286416565">atk work/ Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Even though most of us will spend a <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/7500165">majority of our lives indoors</a>, that doesn’t mean we aren’t still exposed to air pollution. Indoor air contains a wide array of pollutants including chemicals found in many common household items, building materials and cleaning products. </p>
<p>These chemicals (known as <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0045653522039820">volatile organic compounds</a>) can occur in gaseous form, which means we can inhale them. But there’s a sub-group of volatile organic compounds, called <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1352231008008480">semi-volatile organic compounds</a>. These can occur both in gas form and absorbed on solid surfaces (including all indoor surfaces, as well as dust). </p>
<p>Not only can these chemicals enter our body through inhalation, ingestion or by touching a surface containing these compounds, research shows they can also penetrate the skin directly from the air.</p>
<p>Once in our body, these chemicals may harm our health – potentially affecting the <a href="https://www.epa.gov/indoor-air-quality-iaq/volatile-organic-compounds-impact-indoor-air-quality">respiratory system, nervous system, cognitive health</a> and the <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2677823/">hormonal system</a>. </p>
<h2>Skin exposure</h2>
<p>There are many groups of semi-volatile organic compounds. One type you’ll probably come across in your home are <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/biomonitoring/Phthalates_FactSheet.html">phthalates</a>. Phthalates are everywhere and our exposure to them is nearly continuous. </p>
<p>Phthalates are used as plasticisers, added to certain products so they’re softer and more flexible. They can be found in certain types of plastics (such as food packaging or garden hoses), building materials (such as vinyl flooring) and personal care products (including shampoos and hair sprays). </p>
<p>Exposure to these chemicals has been linked to a variety of health problems, including <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048969721024426">lower sperm quality</a>, poorer <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304389423009639">cardiovascular health</a> and altered <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8157593/">growth and development</a> in children. </p>
<p>Once phthalates enter the body, they’re broken down over a few hours to a few days. These breakdown products (metabolites) are then excreted through urine. But while phthalates may be quickly excreted by the body, most of us still have these chemicals in our body almost <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935111000752?via%3Dihub">all the time</a>. This is because we are continuously exposed to these chemicals.</p>
<p>There are many ways we can be exposed to phthalates in our daily lives. While people might think they’re only at risk if they inhale or ingest these chemicals, research shows skin absorption can have a major affect on phthalate levels in the body.</p>
<p>In <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1409151">one study</a>, six participants were exposed to air containing elevated levels of two phthalates in a controlled climate chamber. This was done using latex paint, formulated with a heavy dose of the target phthalates and applied to aluminium plates hanging in the chamber, thus introducing them in the air.</p>
<p>To separately measure the quantity of phthalates absorbed through inhalation versus through skin, the participants were exposed twice – once wearing a tight-fitting breathing hood (exposing them only through skin) and once without the hood (exposing them through both skin and inhalation). The participants only wore shorts in order to increase the exposed skin surface area.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A person dips a paintbrush in white paint." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/571626/original/file-20240126-19-ccqamq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/571626/original/file-20240126-19-ccqamq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/571626/original/file-20240126-19-ccqamq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/571626/original/file-20240126-19-ccqamq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/571626/original/file-20240126-19-ccqamq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/571626/original/file-20240126-19-ccqamq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/571626/original/file-20240126-19-ccqamq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The participants were exposed to phthalates emitted from carefully prepared latex paint with these chemicals.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/man-holds-brush-his-hand-ready-1765689377">Olya Maximenko/ Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Their diet and use of personal care products were restricted, as these can be a <a href="https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1476-069X-13-43">major source of phthalate intake</a>. Participants also collected their urine for several days after exposure. The quantity of phthalates absorbed by participants was estimated from the concentration of phthalate metabolites in their urine.</p>
<p>The participants had a substantial intake of phthalates even when only their skin was exposed. Their exposure was even higher after the test where both their skin and airways were exposed to the chemicals.</p>
<p>In the same study, an additional participant was put through the experiment to better understand how skin absorbs chemicals and whether clothing has a protective effect. The participant was exposed to the phthalates twice. He wore a breathing hood both times, to ensure that the skin was the only absorption route.</p>
<p>In the first experiment, he wore a set of clean clothes. In the second experiment, he wore a set of clothing which had been exposed to the chamber air several days prior. The results were then compared to the bare-skinned participants. The researchers found that the participant’s phthalate exposure was reduced with clean clothes, but it was three to six times higher when wearing the contaminated clothes compared to the participants in the bare-skinned trial. This shows how clothing can also be a reservoir for pollutants.</p>
<p>In <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ina.12327">a follow-up study</a>, similar findings were obtained in nearly identical experiments using nicotine from cigarette smoke as the test chemical. More recently, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.3c06142">research in homes</a> has yielded similar results. </p>
<p><a href="https://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.est.2c08835">Modelling studies</a> have also indicated that perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), another type of commonly used semi-volatile organic compound, can also be absorbed through skin.</p>
<p>All these results highlight the potentially significant role skin absorption plays in air pollution exposure – and of the protective role clothing can have.</p>
<h2>Health harm</h2>
<p>The harm a chemical causes differs depending on <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1438463906001076">how it enters the body</a>. Ingested chemicals pass through the intestines and liver before entering the blood. Inhaled chemicals first pass through the lungs where they may be <a href="https://www.epa.gov/expobox/exposure-assessment-tools-routes-inhalation">absorbed directly into the blood</a>. Chemicals that penetrate the skin can <a href="https://www.epa.gov/expobox/exposure-assessment-tools-routes-dermal">also directly enter the bloodstream</a>. You don’t even need to have an open wound, as the chemicals can be absorbed directly through the skin.</p>
<p>Even for similar exposure levels, the concentration of pollutants in the body differs depending on the exposure route. For example, <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378427411001986">one study</a> modelled the concentration of a chemical called bisphenol-A in the liver and kidney from oral ingestion versus skin exposure. They found that the concentrations in the kidney and liver differed remarkably depending on the route of exposure. </p>
<p>Regardless, the longer you’re exposed to these chemicals, the more likely it is that skin becomes a reservoir for them – eventually becoming a primary route of exposure. Fortunately, there are many things you can do to reduce your vulnerability to these chemicals:</p>
<ol>
<li><a href="https://www.usgbc.org/credits/retail-ci/v2009/eqc45">Use low-emission</a> building materials (such as paints and adhesives) where possible.</li>
<li><a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ina.12396">Clean indoor surfaces</a> to remove any chemicals that might have been deposited on them (especially dusty surfaces).<br></li>
<li><a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/jes201542">Wash clothing</a> and bedding regularly and wash <a href="https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.6b00113">new clothes</a> before wearing them. This will help prevent <a href="https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.3c06142">chemical absorption</a> by your skin.</li>
<li><a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ina.12561">Air out your home regularly</a> (unless your home has a mechanical ventilation system). This will help reduce pollutant concentration in the air. </li>
<li><a href="https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/10.1289/ehp.1409151">Bathing</a> and <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ina.12437">washing hands</a> after exposure can also help reduce skin absorption.</li>
</ol>
<p>By improving indoor air quality, you can lower your risk of exposure to multiple harmful pollutants.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/220930/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Asit Kumar Mishra receives funding from European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement No 101034345. He is affiliated with American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) and International Society of Indoor Air Quality and Climate (ISIAQ). </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Gabriel Bekö is affiliated with the Technical University of Denmark. He is elected member of the Academy of Fellows of the International Society of Indoor Air Quality and Climate. </span></em></p>These pollutants can originate from many common household products – including vinyl flooring, plastic toys, cleaning products and furniture.Asit Kumar Mishra, Research Fellow in School of Public of Health, University College CorkGabriel Bekö, Associate professor, Technical University of DenmarkLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2204982024-01-16T14:14:16Z2024-01-16T14:14:16ZDangerous chemicals found in recycled plastics, making them unsafe for use – experts explain the hazards<p>Plastic pollution is a menace worldwide. Plastics are now <a href="https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abg5433">found</a> in every <a href="https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.1c04158">environment</a> on the planet, from the deepest seas to the atmosphere and human bodies. </p>
<p>Scientific evidence <a href="https://doi.org/10.5334/aogh.4056">describing harm</a> to the environment and humans is growing. Hence, the United Nations has <a href="https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/39812/OEWG_PP_1_INF_1_UNEA%20resolution.pdf">resolved</a> to <a href="https://enb.iisd.org/negotiations/international-legally-binding-instrument-plastics-pollution-including-marine#:%7E:text=The%20United%20Nations%20Environment%20Assembly,pollution%2C%20including%20in%20the%20marine">negotiate</a> a legally binding instrument to end plastic pollution. </p>
<p>Strategies to achieve this goal include provisions throughout the plastics lifespan: production, use, waste management and remediation. </p>
<p>In designing rules for managing plastic, it’s important to understand that plastic materials and waste streams are complex. Not all plastics are the same. And recycled plastics are not necessarily “better” – less harmful – than virgin plastics. If they contained harmful chemicals to begin with, recycling doesn’t make them less harmful. And sometimes they are contaminated by other substances.</p>
<p>We conducted a <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352340923008090?via%3Dihub">study</a> identifying and measuring the concentration of contaminants in recycled pellets from 28 small-scale recycling facilities in the global south. Plastic waste is often exported from high income countries to less developed countries, with few to no requirements for reporting their makeup.</p>
<p>Our investigation covered facilities in Cameroon, Mauritius, Nigeria, Tanzania and Togo in Africa as well others in Asia, Europe and South America. </p>
<p>We found 191 pesticides, 107 pharmaceuticals and 81 industrial compounds among many others in the recycled plastic pellets. Many of these chemicals could be hazardous and make the plastics unsuitable for reuse.</p>
<p>This finding can inform regulations for recycled plastics. The chemical composition of the plastic should be checked before it is recycled. </p>
<h2>Chemicals used in production of plastics</h2>
<p>More than <a href="https://www.unep.org/resources/report/chemicals-plastics-technical-report">13,000 chemicals</a> are currently used in the production of plastic materials and products. They can include thousands of plastics additives – but also substances that are added unintentionally. Some unwanted chemicals form during the production or life of plastics. Thousands of these chemicals have dangerous properties. The health risks of some others are unknown. </p>
<p>Throughout the plastics value chain, during production, use, waste and recycling, other chemicals can contaminate the material too. The result may be recycled materials whose chemical composition is unknown. </p>
<p>Previous studies have reported the presence of <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2017.10.014">plastics additives</a> in recycled materials. Among them were chemicals that are <a href="https://www.unep.org/explore-topics/chemicals-waste/what-we-do/emerging-issues/endocrine-disrupting-chemicals">known</a> to have <a href="https://www.epa.gov/endocrine-disruption/overview-endocrine-disruption">negative effects on health</a>. Examples include <a href="https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0055387">phthalates</a> (plastic softeners), bisphenols like <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0303720706002292">BPA</a>, and <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969721044478?via%3Dihub">UV-stabilisers</a> used to protect plastics from sun damage and yellowing.</p>
<p>In our work, we established the presence of chemicals in recycled plastic that can cause harm to humans or other organisms. They include pesticides, pharmaceuticals and fragrances. Others are chemicals that result from burning natural materials, man-made organic chemicals used for industrial applications like paint, and ultraviolet filters.</p>
<p>We quantified a total of 491 different chemical substances. Some had specific uses and others formed from the breakdown of products.</p>
<p>Some national and regional policies <a href="https://www.basel.int/Implementation/Plasticwaste/Globalgovernance/tabid/8335/Default.aspx">regulate</a> the allowable concentration of hazardous chemicals in specific plastic products. But only 1% of plastics chemicals are subject to international regulation in existing multilateral environmental agreements. Policies don’t adequately address the issue of transparent reporting of chemicals in plastics across their value chain. Also, there are no laws to govern monitoring of chemicals in recycled materials. This is a <a href="https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adk9846">serious gap</a> in oversight. Stronger and more globally coordinated measures are necessary. </p>
<p>Our findings emphasise the importance of regulating mechanical recycling, as many of the substances measured were contaminants and not plastic additives. Many of the chemicals we identified may have contaminated the materials during use. For example, a jug used for storing pesticides will absorb some of the pesticides and will contaminate the recycling waste stream. Plastics in the environment are also known to absorb <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0025326X11005960">organic pollutants</a>. </p>
<p>To assess the quality of recycled plastics, it’s crucial to know which chemicals are present and in what concentrations. This information can guide regulations about how recycled plastics may be used. It will also be valuable for plastics producers, waste management workers (including recyclers), consumers, and the scientific community.</p>
<h2>A path towards safer reuse of plastics</h2>
<p>To recycle more materials safely, several changes are necessary. These include:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>increased transparency regarding the use of chemicals and their risks </p></li>
<li><p>chemical simplification of the plastics market, so that fewer and less toxic chemicals are permitted for use</p></li>
<li><p>improved waste management infrastructure with separated waste streams </p></li>
<li><p>improved recycling methods, including monitoring of hazardous chemicals.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>Chemical simplification of plastic additives will promote sustainability, safety and regulatory compliance. It will help manufacturers to minimise the environmental impact and adverse health effects of complex chemical formulations. Simpler chemical structures also improve the recycling potential of plastics and make recycling more efficient and cost-effective.</p>
<p><a href="https://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.est.1c04903">Chemical simplification</a> can also reduce potential health risks in the disposal of plastic materials. </p>
<p>From a regulatory perspective, chemical simplification supports clearer and more enforceable safety guidelines.</p>
<p>It’s is a crucial step towards the sustainable production and use of plastics, as countries work towards a legal instrument to end pollution.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/220498/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Bethanie Carney Almroth receives funding from the Swedish Research Council for Sustainable Development
FORMAS (grant number 2021-00913) and The Carl Tryggers Foundation (grant number 21:1234).
</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Eric Carmona Martinez received funding from Carl Trygger Foundation. </span></em></p>Recycled plastics are not safe if the chemicals used in creating them in the first place are harmful.Bethanie Carney Almroth, Associate Professor, Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of GothenburgEric Carmona Martinez, Scientist, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research-UFZLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1979582023-02-08T18:39:14Z2023-02-08T18:39:14ZMicroplastics: are plastic alternatives any safer for our health?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/508162/original/file-20230204-12285-zhdbbd.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">file tl gdj</span> </figcaption></figure><p>Plastic pollution is now pervasive in our environment, contaminating everywhere from our homes and workplaces to the <a href="https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/microplastics-in-virtually-every-crevice-on-earth">planet’s deepest recesses</a>. The problem regularly makes headlines, with the spotlight turned toward <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-03793-3">ocean pollution</a> in particular.</p>
<p>The startling images of plastic pollution may seem far removed from our lives, but they should not distract us from a problem that is less visible and so receives far less attention and affects human beings and ecosystems – microplastic and nanoplastic contamination.</p>
<p>In contrast to macroplastics, which result from the degradation of larger objects (found in the form of paint flakes or fibres, for example), microplastics are usually defined as particles whose size or dimensions do not exceed 5 mm. They have no minimum size.</p>
<p>As for nanoplastics, these can be no larger than 0.1 micron, equal to 1/10,000th of a millimetre. Rather instinctively, we were able to predict that the smallest particles could enter organisms, but this had never actually been demonstrated until recently.</p>
<h2>Microplastics in our blood</h2>
<p>In 2022, a study conducted by several teams in the Netherlands showed for the first time ever that microplastics were present in the blood of 22 healthy human volunteers at an <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412022001258">average concentration of 1.6 mg/L</a>.</p>
<p>The kinds of plastics detected varied greatly, and including polyethylene terephthalate (PET), used to make water bottles and other items; polyethylene, used to produce food containers; and polystyrene, whose uses include fresh produce packaging and yogurt pots.</p>
<p>It should be noted that the study focused solely on particles with dimensions of 700 nm and above, and that there is as yet no information on the smaller particles categorised among the many forms of nanoplastics.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/nxEQkVPBJjQ?wmode=transparent&start=3" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Microplastics detected in human blood for the very first time (Down to Earth, 25 mars 2022).</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Adverse health effects in animals</h2>
<p>Although no effects on human health were reported in the study, research conducted on animals or using cellular models (some of which modelled human cells) have documented a host of biological impacts from microplastics, <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32111046/">including cellular lesions, oxidative stress and damage to DNA</a>.</p>
<p>In these cases, either the microplastics cause the effects directly or they act as carriers of other harmful substances. Moreover, some of these substances, such as bisphenols or phthalates, are actually found in the composition of some plastics.</p>
<p>Generally, this contamination may manifest as inflammation or fibrosis, whose effects are already observed in humans via other ways of entry, such as the respiratory tract. The lungs, for instance, have been a reported site of contamination <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28531345/">for workers in the plastics industry</a>.</p>
<h2>Migration into food and drink</h2>
<p>How can we explain this contamination of the healthy volunteers in the study? Simply put, it is linked to the food chain, although this method of microplastics exposure remains difficult to characterise or measure, with results varying drastically between <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30861380/">0.2 mg per year</a> and <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33130380/">0.1 to 5 g per week</a>.</p>
<p>Nonetheless, a vast number of studies (more than 1,000) clearly indicate that several molecules can migrate into food or drink upon contact. This is the case for reusable plastic sports bottles, which shed a huge quantity of components, and all the more so when <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35091188/">cleaned in the dishwasher</a>.</p>
<p>[<em>Nearly 80,000 readers look to The Conversation France’s newsletter for expert insights into the world’s most pressing issues</em>. <a href="https://theconversation.com/fr/newsletters/la-newsletter-quotidienne-5?utm_source=inline-70ksignup">Sign up now</a>]</p>
<p>An effective way to prevent potential health risks from microplastics and nanoplastics would be to reduce our exposure, especially in our digestive tract. It is vital for us to change practices at the consumer level, particularly with for the most vulnerable – pregnant women, infants, young children and adolescents, whose systems of detoxification have not yet matured and whose bodies are still developing.</p>
<p>It should also be noted that these groups are more exposed to plastics per pound of body mass than adults are, further compounding the risks to their health.</p>
<h2>The perils of reheating food in plastic containers</h2>
<p>Positive changes that we can make include reducing our consumption of processed products and packaged raw products; limiting use of containers or components made even partially from plastic (such as cardboard cups, pizza boxes, etc.); and avoiding storing, cooking or reheating food in plastic containers (when using a microwave, for instance).</p>
<p>This is because it has been demonstrated that <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33905306/">heat causes plastic components to break down</a>, which, in turn, causes <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0304389422017769">particles to leach into our food</a>.</p>
<p>These more positive habits would also help reduce the overall amount of microplastics and nanoplastics in our environment and ecosystems, leading to a natural decrease in the contamination of our digestive system.</p>
<p>Starting from 2025, <a href="https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20221219-france-bans-disposable-packaging-utensils-in-fast-food-restaurants">France</a> will be banning single-use plastic containers in collective catering (especially school cafeterias).</p>
<p>But are the alternatives any better? In France, it is up to each municipality to choose which alternative materials to use, whether these be stainless steel, cellulose (a component of plant cell walls), bamboo or bioplastics.</p>
<h2>Bioplastics may not be any safer</h2>
<p>Containers made from bioplastics are a handy alternative widely used by the agrifood industry, since they are lighter than the more conventional, allegedly “inert” receptacles made of stainless steel or glass.</p>
<p>But what are bioplastics made of? They are sourced from plants, but blended with synthetic materials to ensure that they are as waterproof as traditional plastics.</p>
<p>Upon seeing the prefix “bio”, consumers may be led to believe that they are purchasing a natural product that presents no health risk. In terms of regulations, bioplastics must undergo the same tests other plastic containers, and their rate of migration into food is also capped at 60 mg/kg.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, only a small number of tests (primarily regarding their effects on DNA) have been carried out, none of which examine their potential impacts as hormone disruptors. Recent scientific literature has not yet proved whether or not they are harmless to humans. Lastly, when it comes to biodegradability, all bioplastics still break down into microplastics.</p>
<h2>Stay wary of “alternatives”</h2>
<p>Such questions are important to consider in a world that tends to brush away the environmental impact of certain products by offering alternatives (think of biofuels, “green” hydrogen or e-cigarettes) whose effects themselves are little known. In this respect, the <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-that-bpa-free-label-isnt-telling-you-34725">substitution of bisphenol A with other bisphenols</a> (such as S and F) should make the scientific community stop and think, as reports increasingly show them to have similar or other deleterious effects.</p>
<p>Given their origin and manufacturing method, it appears only appropriate to ask these same questions with regard to “bioplastics”, so as to prevent consumers from inadvertently becoming a source of environmental contamination when attempting to be eco-friendly. In France, the National Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health and Safety (<a href="https://www.anses.fr/fr/proscrire-matieres-plastiques-biodegradables-compost">ANSES</a>) also advises against the use of “biodegradable” or “compostable” single-use plastic bags in household compost bins, as it is not certain that such products break down fully during composting.</p>
<p>It is crucial that local authorities be better informed on the characteristics of bioplastics. This will allow them to design policies that will help protect consumers, especially children, who are particularly vulnerable to pollution.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Translated from the French by Enda Boorman for <a href="http://www.fastforword.fr/en">Fast ForWord</a>.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/197958/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Xavier Coumoul has received funding from the European Commission, ANR, Anses, Inca, Inserm and Université Paris Cité.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jean-Baptiste Fini has received funding from the European Commission, the ANR, the Anses, the CNRS and the MNHN.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nicolas Cabaton has received funding from INRAE (Human Food Department), ANSES, ANR, Ecophyto, the European Commission, and is part of a project funded by ANR with JB Fini as scientific coordinator.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sylvie Bortoli has received funding from the ANR, Anses, ITMO Cancer and Inserm.</span></em></p>Alternative food containers, such as those made of bioplastics, are being promoted as a way to reduce our exposure to plastic in food. But there is still a lack of knowledge around their impacts.Xavier Coumoul, Professor of Toxicology and Biochemistry, Université Paris CitéJean-Baptiste Fini, Professeur du MNHN, Muséum national d’histoire naturelle (MNHN)Nicolas Cabaton, Chercheur en Toxicologie, InraeSylvie Bortoli, Ingénieure de Recherche, Université Paris CitéLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1880892022-10-13T08:16:14Z2022-10-13T08:16:14ZJust how safe are cosmetics on the European market?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/482014/original/file-20220831-26-pzawkk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C9%2C2048%2C1352&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Regulations in the US and EU are intended to ensure that cosmetics and other personal-care products are safe, but the two continents approach the issue in different ways.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/30478819@N08/50301489872">Marco Verch/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>When was the last time you read the ingredient label on a bottle of shampoo? Have you ever sneezed when applying face powder? As you lay on the beach this summer, did you wonder what it was in your sunscreen that blocked the sun’s UV light and protected your skin?</p>
<p>A large number of chemical substances are used in many such products. The HBO documentary series <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDcs6N44Aok"><em>Not So Pretty</em></a> investigates harmful chemicals used in the beauty industry and centres, in particular, on the experiences of consumers and workers who say that they were exposed to harmful substances in personal-hygiene products. Above all, it is a chilling exposé of the lack of regulation of cosmetics in the United States.</p>
<p>According to the <a href="https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetics-laws-regulations/prohibited-restricted-ingredients-cosmetics">US Food & Drug Administration</a> (FDA), the United States has only banned 11 harmful substances in cosmetic products. By comparison, the European Union (EU), prohibits more than 1,300 substances, and restricts more than 250 with a concentration threshold.</p>
<p>The United States is one of the world’s largest markets of the cosmetics industry. Studies conducted <a href="https://drum.lib.umd.edu/bitstream/handle/1903/26403/Article.pdf">there</a>, in <a href="https://repository.ubn.ru.nl/bitstream/handle/2066/157068/157068.pdf;PDF#page=22">Europe</a>, and in <a href="https://www-nature-com.proxy.bnl.lu/articles/jes201720">Asia</a> have confirmed that women tend to consume cosmetics and personal-hygiene products much more than men and tend to account for the vast majority of workers (90%) in professional beauty services such as hair and nail salons.</p>
<p>Some interviewed in the series claim to have contracted <a href="https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/mesothelioma/symptoms-causes/syc-20375022">mesothelioma</a>, a cancer that affects tissue surrounding bodily organs, due to asbestos detected in talc and make-up. Others explain they have suffered fertility problems and even miscarriages as a result of exposure to “everyday chemicals” upsetting hormones, formally known as endocrine disruptors. These include bisphenol A (BPA), which can be found in eye make-up and nail varnish, or phthalates, which keep nail polish from cracking and help the scent of perfumes linger.</p>
<h2>The differences between the continents</h2>
<p>Despite the parallels, the continents fundamentally differ over how they regulate substances in cosmetics and other personal-hygiene products.</p>
<p>The FDA has <a href="https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetics-laws-regulations/fda-authority-over-cosmetics-how-cosmetics-are-not-fda-approved-are-fda-regulated">little power</a> when it comes to demanding manufacturers disclose their products’ ingredients and safety data. In the absence of such critical information, the agency must nevertheless bear the burden of proof and show that a certain substance is harmful in its intended use in order to withdraw it from circulation.</p>
<p>By contrast, in the EU the <a href="https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/cosmetics/legislation_en">Cosmetic Products Regulation</a> framework sets the rules for placing substances on the market on the basis of their human health impacts. The <a href="https://www.coslaw.eu/what-is-the-scientific-committee-on-consumer-safety-sccs/">Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety</a> (SCCS) also advises the European Commission on the health and safety risks of cosmetic products and their ingredients. Lastly, and contrary to the US, the burden of proof of safety is on the manufacturer, which must add data on cosmetic products to the <a href="https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/cosmetics/cosmetic-product-notification-portal_en">Cosmetic Products Notification Portal</a> (CPNP) available to competent authorities, SCCS, and poison centres.</p>
<h2>Keeping make-up users safe in Europe</h2>
<p>In Europe, the manufacturer is always responsible for the safety of the products it places on the market, and each product must have undergone a safety assessment before it is sold. The rule of thumb is that substances that are classified as carcinogenic, mutagenic or toxic for reproduction (CMR) of category 1 or 2 are prohibited from cosmetics. Following a mandatory safety assessment by the SCCS, certain exceptions may be granted. Other EU chemicals regulations complement the safety provisions based on a classification procedure for hazardous substances such as CMR, as well as providing a safety net for environmental risks posed by cosmetics after they’re washed off.</p>
<p>A quick glance over the <a href="https://echa.europa.eu/fr/cosmetics-prohibited-substances">prohibited substances list</a> of the European Cosmetics Products Regulation reveals that asbestos is banned from all cosmetic products. Moreover, the production and marketing of asbestos is completely prohibited, except in the case of its use for the production of <a href="https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/ea9dc42d-7656-8afd-09e4-d8b41fae2c9c">chlorine and sodium hydroxide</a>, two chemicals found in household cleaners, according to the regulator. Asbestos is thus a clear and strict “no go” on the European cosmetics market.</p>
<p>Similarly, BPA and phthalates are also prohibited in cosmetics. BPA is officially classified in the EU as toxic for reproduction, an endocrine disruptor and included in the candidate list of <a href="https://echa.europa.eu/candidate-list-table">substances of very high concern</a> (SVHC). This means the consumer can request that manufacturers inform them of the presence of the chemical in their articles starting from 0.1% by weight in the article, as specified under the EU’s <a href="https://echa.europa.eu/regulations/reach/understanding-reach">REACH regulation</a>.</p>
<p>What about titanium dioxide? A white and opaque powder, the chemical has been used for almost a century as a white pigment and can be found in colour cosmetics such as eye shadow and blush, loose and pressed powders. Its resistance to ultra-violent light also make it a key ingredient in many sunscreens. The EU classifies it as a category 2 carcinogen by inhalation, which means this substance is suspected to cause cancer when inhaled. Certain restrictions on its use in cosmetic products are in place and these are especially prevalent in products that are sprayed. For example, a limit threshold of 1.1% is set in professional hair aerosol spray products and in colourants. Powder applications that “may lead to exposure of the user’s lungs by inhalation” are prohibited.</p>
<h2>How confident can EU consumers be?</h2>
<p>When it comes to the legal frameworks around chemicals and cosmetic products, the European market has extensive safety provisions.</p>
<p>However, regulation may be challenging to enforce within the realm of international trade and online sales. <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/safety-gate-alerts/screen/webReport">EU reports</a> have highlighted the presence of some harmful substances in cosmetics and other personal-care products circulating on the European market. In 2018, one brand of make-up, including some items made in China destined for children, was found to contain asbestos in Czech Republic and the Netherlands.</p>
<p>The European enforcement authorities collaborate to avoid such products on the EU market, and the <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/safety-gate-alerts/screen/webReport">Safety Gate platform</a> alerts consumers to non-compliant goods within the EU. Furthermore, the 2020 <a href="https://echa.europa.eu/hot-topics/chemicals-strategy-for-sustainability">European Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability</a> aims at an even higher level of consumer and environmental protection with its various actions such as the consideration of “cocktail effects” of chemicals.</p>
<h2>Reducing your exposure to harmful chemicals: a checklist</h2>
<p>For European consumers seeking to reduce their potential exposure to harmful chemicals, here are some safety guidelines and resources:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>If you are sensitive to common allergens, seek out unscented cosmetics whose labels do not contain the words <em>fragrance</em> or <em>perfume</em>.</p></li>
<li><p>For the sake of the environment and personal health, try to limit the dosage used. Be it a shampoo or a cleaning agent, usually small amounts are enough for the purpose of getting your hair or a surface cleaned.</p></li>
<li><p>Be wary of less-expensive imported cosmetic and hygiene products. The consumer could look at the label and check the country where the product has been manufactured. Manufacturers outside the EU are not necessarily aware of EU regulations and may pay less attention to product safety.</p></li>
<li><p>Tell your medical professional about any unwanted side effects following the use of a product. Keep the product packaging and label for further reference.</p></li>
<li><p>Use the help of European apps detecting chemicals in products, such as <a href="https://incibeauty.com/en">INCI Beauty</a> (for cosmetics), <a href="https://www.bund-naturschutz.de/oekologisch-leben/einkaufen/toxfox">ToxFox</a> (for cosmetics and articles), and <a href="https://www.ineris.fr/fr/risques/dossiers-thematiques/substances-chimiques-consommation-scan4chem-accompagne/scan4chem">Scan4Chem</a> (for everyday articles such as clothing, kitchenware, sports equipment, electronics, etc.)</p></li>
<li><p>Use your right to know about SVHCs in articles by requesting information from suppliers.</p></li>
</ul>
<hr>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/310261/original/file-20200115-134768-1tax26b.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/310261/original/file-20200115-134768-1tax26b.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=158&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/310261/original/file-20200115-134768-1tax26b.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=158&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/310261/original/file-20200115-134768-1tax26b.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=158&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/310261/original/file-20200115-134768-1tax26b.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=198&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/310261/original/file-20200115-134768-1tax26b.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=198&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/310261/original/file-20200115-134768-1tax26b.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=198&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em>Created in 2007 to help accelerate and share scientific knowledge on key societal issues, the AXA Research Fund has supported nearly 700 projects around the world conducted by researchers in 38 countries. To learn more, visit the site of the AXA Research Fund or follow on Twitter @AXAResearchFund.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/188089/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Oona Freudenthal a reçu des financements d'AXA Research Fund. Elle est membre de Committee for Socio-Economic Analysis de l'Agence Europeenne des Produits Chimiques (ECHA).</span></em></p>From miscarriages to cancer, poor regulation of cosmetics in the US have taken a devastating toll on consumers’ lives. Are European consumers any safer?Oona Freudenthal, R&T Associate, Luxembourg Institute of Science and Technology (LIST)Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1788722022-03-30T14:55:29Z2022-03-30T14:55:29ZScience shows that BPA and other endocrine disruptors are harmful to human health, which should incite tighter regulations<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/452623/original/file-20220316-8334-1f833zv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=60%2C45%2C3253%2C2224&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">BPA is an industrial chemical used to make hard, clear plastic known as polycarbonate. It's also used in the lining of some cans. Many hard plastic bottles no longer contain BPA, and it's illegal to sell baby bottles with BPA in Canada.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jonathan Hayward</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>More than two decades after the publication of <a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.ca/books/328770/our-stolen-future-by-theo-colborn/9780452274143"><em>Our Stolen Future</em></a>, what is the state of research on endocrine disruptors? Are those sneaky contaminants continue to interfere with our hormones?</p>
<p>In the book, scientists Theo Colborn and John Peterson Myers, along with journalist Dianne Dumanoski, shed light on the terrible effects that many environmental contaminants are having on the health of living things, as they interact with the hormonal system, also called the endocrine system. </p>
<p>These chemicals, called <a href="https://www.unep.org/explore-topics/chemicals-waste/what-we-do/emerging-issues/endocrine-disrupting-chemicals">endocrine disruptors</a>, can mimic or interfere with the body’s hormones, including thyroid hormones, estrogen, testosterone, etc. Endocrine disruptors can impair the development and proper functioning of the reproductive, nervous and immune systems in humans and animals, and can affect future generations.</p>
<p>One of us, Valérie, holds the Canada Research Chair in Ecotoxicogenomics and Endocrine Disruption. The other, Isabelle, studies the environmental causes of breast cancer. Together, we founded the <a href="https://www.ciape-iceda.ca/?lang=en">Intersectorial Centre for Endocrine Disruptor Analysis</a> (ICEDA) at the Institut national de la recherche scientifique.</p>
<p>Along with our colleagues, we recently published <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/environmental-research/special-issue/10TZJBCC3C3">a collection of articles that review the scientific literature on endocrine disruptors</a> and their deleterious impacts on health. </p>
<h2>The origin of endocrine disruptors</h2>
<p><a href="https://www.trentu.ca/wqc/facultystaff/cmetcalfe">Chris Metcalfe</a>, professor emeritus in the environment school at Trent University, and his colleagues have <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2021.112658">identified</a> several endocrine disruptors in the environment (water, soil, air, sediment), in food and consumer products. These include organochlorine pesticides, brominated flame retardants, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (used in non-stick coatings), alkylphenols (used in detergents), phthalates (used in cosmetics), bisphenol A and its analogues (used in plastics), organotins (used as anti-fouling agents) and others.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/home-garden-safety/bisphenol-bpa.html">Bisphenol A</a> (or BPA) is a good example of an endocrine disruptor. Since 1960, it has been incorporated into most of the plastics we use every day, from plastic bottles and food containers to <a href="https://environmentaldefence.ca/2021/01/26/loblaw-costco-ban-toxic-bpa-bps-receipts/">cash register receipts</a> and canned goods.</p>
<p>BPA has a structure that resembles natural estrogen. Because of this, it was considered for use as a medication to treat menopausal women in the 1930s, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsx.2021.03.031">prior to its widespread use the production of plastics a few decades later</a>.</p>
<p>In the body, BPA binds to estrogen receptors in cells and induces inappropriate and untimely responses, such as increasing cell proliferation, <a href="https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/10.1289/ehp.9282">which could promote the development of tumours</a>.</p>
<h2>Infertility in animal species</h2>
<p>A <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2021.112584">literature review</a> led by <a href="https://www.sfu.ca/biology/people/faculty/vlm1.html">Vicki Marlatt</a>, an environmental toxicology researcher at Simon Fraser University, reveals a damning and widespread finding: many of these environmental contaminants impair reproduction in fish, amphibians, birds, mammals and humans, reducing their chances of producing viable offspring.</p>
<p>In humans and other animals, embryonic development and early life stages are the periods most susceptible to the effects of these contaminants.</p>
<p><a href="https://inrs.ca/en/research/professors/geraldine-delbes/">Géraldine Delbès</a>, a professor of reproductive toxicology at INRS, and her colleagues <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2021.112040">have shown</a> that exposure to endocrine disruptors during this window of susceptibility leads to changes in testicular and ovarian programming. </p>
<p>For example, a decrease in androgens (testosterone and dihydrotestosterone) and an increase in estrogens can lead to a developmental disorder of the testes in children called <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/16.5.972">testicular dysgenesis syndrome</a>, which has increased globally in the past 50 years.</p>
<h2>Fetal exposure can lead to adult disease</h2>
<p>Our research with <a href="https://inrs.ca/en/research/professors/cathy-vaillancourt/">Cathy Vaillancourt</a>, who studies pregnancy and toxicology at INRS, has shown that endocrine disruptors can interfere with <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2021.112435">the hormones produced by the placenta, known for its robust defence barriers</a>, which can lead to health complications later in life. Chronic diseases such as diabetes and obesity have been associated with exposure to endocrine disruptors crossing the placental barrier during fetal development.</p>
<p>We also have <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2021.112435">shown that early exposure to endocrine modulators</a> can affect the development of fetal mammary glands, and increase the risk of developing breast cancer in adulthood. These include BPA, brominated flame retardants and diethylstilbestrol (DES). Research by <a href="https://www.crchudequebec.ulaval.ca/en/research/researchers/etienne-audet-walsh/">Étienne Audet-Walsh</a>, who studies endocrinology and nephrology at Laval University, and his colleagues has suggested that <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34562481/">exposure to endocrine disruptors could be linked to the development prostate cancer</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A syringe, stethoscope and paper with the word 'Diabetes' written across the type of it." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/452622/original/file-20220316-8416-l0hij2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/452622/original/file-20220316-8416-l0hij2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/452622/original/file-20220316-8416-l0hij2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/452622/original/file-20220316-8416-l0hij2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/452622/original/file-20220316-8416-l0hij2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/452622/original/file-20220316-8416-l0hij2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/452622/original/file-20220316-8416-l0hij2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Some studies have found links between endocrine disruptors and the development of diabetes.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Multiple physiological effects</h2>
<p>Endocrine disruptors can also alter other hormonal pathways, including those of the thyroid gland, which are also involved in stress control, immunity and metabolism.</p>
<p>With <a href="https://www.uvic.ca/science/biochem/people/faculty/profiles-new/helbing-caren.php">Caren Helbing</a>, a biochemist at the University of Victoria, we have developed an understanding of <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2021.111906">the impacts altered thyroid hormone levels can have on other hormonal systems</a>. For example, when endocrine disruptors decrease levels of thyroid hormones, reproduction, stress and metabolism are also affected.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.vetmed.ufl.edu/profile/martyniuk-christopher/">Chris Martyniuk</a>, an animal physiologist at the University of Florida, and his team <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2021.111904">have identified</a> new targets of endocrine modulators, such as glucocorticoids (corticosteroids). They cite two examples of studies in their work, including the link between high levels of BPA in urine and an increased risk of cardiovascular disease. Certain endocrine disruptors (arsenic, phthalates, organophosphate pesticides) can interfere with insulin and lead to obesity.</p>
<h2>From one generation to the next</h2>
<p>Endocrine disruptors may also have transgenerational effects. For example, when <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1811695115">fish are exposed to water contaminated with antidepressants</a>, the offspring of their offspring show an altered stress response, even if that generations was never exposed to these chemicals.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.mcgill.ca/robairelab/">Bernard Robaire</a>, a professor of reproduction, pharmacology and toxicology at McGill University, has attempted to explain how endocrine disruptors affect future generations. The data he and his team have compiled indicates that the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2021.112063">effects of these chemicals are not the result of changes in the genetic code</a>, but other cellular changes, including which genes are turned on or off, a mechanism called <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/neuroscience/epigenetic-mechanism">epigenetics</a>.</p>
<p>The long-term extent of these consequences is not completely understood. Additional genetic and epigenetic research on the mechanisms underlying the action of endocrine disruptors will be needed, but we also need a better understanding the roles of social, metabolic and environmental stressors.</p>
<p>Globally, we believe that international collaboration and leadership are increasingly needed to advance the science of endocrine disruptors. We must move from the stage of research that characterizes the negative health effects of these chemicals to one that develops best practices for their regulation, which remains an important topic of discussion around the world.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/178872/count.gif" alt="La Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Valérie S. Langlois has received funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) and Canada Research Chairs. She is the Director of the Intersectoral Center for the Analysis of Endocrine Disruptors (ICEDA), which is funded by the Institut national de la recherche scientifique (INRS).</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Isabelle Plante has received funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), the Cancer Research Society (CRS) and the Fonds de recherche du Québec-Santé (FRQS). She is the co-director of the Intersectoral Centre for Endocrine Disruptors Analysis (CIAPE-ICEDA) which is funded by the Institut national de la recherche scientifique (INRS).</span></em></p>There is abundant evidence of the involvement of endocrine disruptors in reproductive dysfunction in several species, including humans.Valérie S. Langlois, Professor/Professeure titulaire, Institut national de la recherche scientifique (INRS)Isabelle Plante, Associate Professor, Institut national de la recherche scientifique (INRS)Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1637952021-07-30T12:22:48Z2021-07-30T12:22:48ZMale fertility is declining – studies show that environmental toxins could be a reason<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/413819/original/file-20210729-15-sq2owv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C105%2C4345%2C3244&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">For decades, sperm counts and sperm health have been declining.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/sperm-cells-about-to-fertilize-an-ovum-new-life-royalty-free-image/1212523166?adppopup=true">Carol Yepes/Moment via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>In the U.S., nearly 1 in 8 couples <a href="https://www.nichd.nih.gov/health/topics/menshealth/conditioninfo/infertility#f1">struggles with infertility</a>. Unfortunately, physicians like me who specialize in reproductive medicine are unable to determine the cause of male infertility around <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(20)32667-2">30% to 50% of the time</a>. There is almost nothing more disheartening than telling a couple “I don’t know” or “There’s nothing I can do to help.” </p>
<p>Upon getting this news, couple after couple asks me questions that all follow a similar line of thinking. “What about his work, his cellphone, our laptops, all these plastics? Do you think they could have contributed to this?” </p>
<p>What my patients are really asking me is a big question in male reproductive health: Does environmental toxicity contribute to male infertility? </p>
<h2>Male fertility decline</h2>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/413822/original/file-20210729-25-12sy39n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A medical professional sitting with a couple." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/413822/original/file-20210729-25-12sy39n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/413822/original/file-20210729-25-12sy39n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/413822/original/file-20210729-25-12sy39n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/413822/original/file-20210729-25-12sy39n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/413822/original/file-20210729-25-12sy39n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/413822/original/file-20210729-25-12sy39n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/413822/original/file-20210729-25-12sy39n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">If a couple is struggling to get pregnant, doctors will try to figure out the cause.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/doctor-consulting-with-patients-royalty-free-image/899796660?adppopup=true">Philippe Roy/Cultura via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Infertility is defined as a couple’s inability to get pregnant for one year despite regular intercourse. When this is the case, doctors evaluate both partners to determine why.</p>
<p>For men, the cornerstone of the fertility evaluation is semen analysis, and there are a number of ways to assess sperm. Sperm count – the total number of sperm a man produces – and sperm concentration – number of sperm per milliliter of semen – are common measures, but they aren’t the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dev058">best predictors of fertility</a>. A more accurate measure looks at <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dev058">the total motile sperm count</a>, which evaluates the fraction of sperm that are able to swim and move. </p>
<p>A wide range of factors – from <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(20)32667-2">obesity to hormonal imbalances to genetic diseases</a> – can affect fertility. For many men, there are <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(20)32667-2">treatments</a> that can help. But starting in the 1990s, researchers noticed a concerning trend. Even when controlling for many of the known risk factors, male fertility <a href="https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.00108961">appeared to have been declining for decades</a>. </p>
<p>In 1992, a study found a global <a href="https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.305.6854.609">50% decline in sperm counts in men over the previous 60 years</a>. Multiple studies over <a href="https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.00108961">subsequent years</a> confirmed that initial finding, including a 2017 paper showing a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmx022">50% to 60% decline in sperm concentration between 1973 and 2011</a> in men from around the world. </p>
<p>These studies, though important, focused on sperm concentration or total sperm count. So in 2019, a team of researchers decided to focus on the more powerful total motile sperm count. They found that the proportion of men with a normal total motile sperm count <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2019.06.038">had declined by approximately 10% over the previous 16 years</a>. </p>
<p>The science is consistent: Men today produce fewer sperm than in the past, and the sperm are less healthy. The question, then, is what could be causing this decline in fertility.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/413820/original/file-20210729-13-1bci2lm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A stack of reddish plastic pipes." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/413820/original/file-20210729-13-1bci2lm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/413820/original/file-20210729-13-1bci2lm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=451&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/413820/original/file-20210729-13-1bci2lm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=451&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/413820/original/file-20210729-13-1bci2lm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=451&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/413820/original/file-20210729-13-1bci2lm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=567&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/413820/original/file-20210729-13-1bci2lm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=567&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/413820/original/file-20210729-13-1bci2lm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=567&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Plasticizers are common endocrine-disrupting compounds, found in many plastics – like PVC pipes – that come in contact with food or water.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pvc_cevi.jpg#/media/File:Pvc_cevi.jpg">Mm Zaletel/Wikimedia Commons</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Environmental toxicity and reproduction</h2>
<p>Scientists have known for years that, at least in <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/biomonitoring/Phthalates_FactSheet.html">animal models</a>, environmental toxic exposure can alter hormonal balance and throw off reproduction. Researchers can’t intentionally expose human patients to harmful compounds and measure outcomes, but we can try to assess associations. </p>
<p>As the downward trend in male fertility emerged, I and other researchers began looking more toward chemicals in the environment for answers. This approach doesn’t allow us to definitively establish which chemicals are causing the male fertility decline, but the <a href="https://doi.org/10.21037/tau-20-685">weight of the evidence is growing</a>. </p>
<p>A lot of this research focuses on <a href="https://www.endocrine.org/topics/edc/what-edcs-are/common-edcs/reproduction">endocrine disrupters</a>, molecules that mimic the body’s hormones and <a href="https://doi.org/10.21037/tau-20-685">throw off the fragile hormonal balance of reproduction</a>. These include substances like phthalates – better known as plasticizers – as well as pesticides, herbicides, heavy metals, toxic gases and other synthetic materials. </p>
<p>Plasticizers are found in most plastics – like water bottles and food containers – and exposure is associated with <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.07.029">negative impacts on testosterone and semen health</a>.
Herbicides and pesticides abound in the food supply and some – specifically those with synthetic organic compounds that include phosphorus – are <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.toxlet.2014.01.029">known to negatively affect fertility</a>.</p>
<p>Air pollution surrounds cities, subjecting residents to particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and other compounds that likely <a href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s12958-018-0430-2">contribute to abnormal sperm quality</a>. Radiation exposure from laptops, cellphones and modems has also been associated with <a href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s12958-018-0431-1">declining sperm counts, impaired sperm motility and abnormal sperm shape</a>. Heavy metals such as cadmium, lead and arsenic are also present in food, water and cosmetics and are also known to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reprotox.2017.07.021">harm sperm health</a>.</p>
<p>Endocrine-disrupting compounds and the infertility problems they cause are taking a significant toll on human <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2006.12.003">physical and emotional</a> health. And treating these harms <a href="https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2014-4325">is costly</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/414202/original/file-20210802-24-1jv2xsg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A sign warning of chemicals that cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/414202/original/file-20210802-24-1jv2xsg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/414202/original/file-20210802-24-1jv2xsg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=452&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/414202/original/file-20210802-24-1jv2xsg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=452&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/414202/original/file-20210802-24-1jv2xsg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=452&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/414202/original/file-20210802-24-1jv2xsg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=568&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/414202/original/file-20210802-24-1jv2xsg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=568&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/414202/original/file-20210802-24-1jv2xsg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=568&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Thousands of new chemicals are introduced every year and government agencies do their best to keep up.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/prop-65-warning-posted-on-the-window-of-a-ventura-auto-news-photo/564054361?adppopup=true">Stephen Osman/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>The effects of unregulated chemicals</h2>
<p>A lot of chemicals are in use today, and tracking them all is incredibly difficult. More than <a href="https://archive.epa.gov/oig/catalog/web/html/167.html">80,000 chemicals are registered in the U.S.</a> and nearly <a href="https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/annualreport/2019/annualreport_508.pdf">2,000 new chemicals are introduced each year</a>. Many scientists believe that the safety testing for health and environmental risks <a href="https://theconversation.com/will-the-new-toxic-chemical-safety-law-protect-us-60769">is not strong enough</a> and that the rapid development and introduction of new chemicals challenges the ability of organizations to <a href="https://www.ewg.org/news-insights/news/top-problems-two-tsca-bills">test long-term risks to human health</a>.</p>
<p>Current U.S. regulations follow the principle of <a href="https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031914-122654">innocent until proved guilty</a> and are <a href="https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.0800404">less comprehensive and restrictive</a> than <a href="https://echa.europa.eu/home">similar regulations in Europe</a>, for example. The <a href="https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/78102/WHO_HSE_PHE_IHE_2013.1_eng.pdf?sequence=1">World Health Organization</a> recently identified 800 compounds capable of disrupting hormones, only a small fraction of which have been tested. </p>
<p>A trade group, the American Chemistry Council, says on its website that manufacturers “have the regulatory certainty they need to innovate, grow, create jobs and win in the global marketplace – at the same time that public health and the environment benefit from strong risk-based protections.” </p>
<p>But the reality of the current regulatory system in the U.S. is that chemicals are introduced with minimal testing and taken off the market only when harm is proved. And that can <a href="https://theconversation.com/will-the-new-toxic-chemical-safety-law-protect-us-60769">take decades</a>.</p>
<p>Dr. Niels Skakkebaek, the lead researcher on one of the <a href="https://www.newsweek.com/2017/09/22/male-infertility-crisis-experts-663074.html">first manuscripts</a> on decreasing sperm counts, called the male fertility decline a “wake-up call to all of us.” My patients have provided a wake–up call for me that increased public awareness and advocacy are important to protect global reproductive health now and in the future. I’m not a toxicologist and can’t identify the cause of the infertility trends I’m seeing, but as physician, I am concerned that too much of the burden of proof is falling on the human body and people who become my patients.</p>
<p><em>This article was updated to more accurately represent the chemical regulatory system in the U.S.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/163795/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ryan P. Smith receives funding from a Virginia Catalyst grant for male contraceptive research. </span></em></p>People are exposed to toxic substances – like pesticides, chemicals in plastics and radiation – every day. A growing body of research shows that this exposure is causing a decline in male fertility.Ryan P. Smith, Associate Professor of Urology, University of VirginiaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1610372021-06-02T13:24:16Z2021-06-02T13:24:16ZToxic chemicals linked to lower egg counts in women<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/403992/original/file-20210602-25-1ab7ae9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=51%2C0%2C5760%2C3828&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">This is the first study to investigate how chemical exposure impacts the number of eggs a woman has.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/gynecologist-communicates-her-patient-indicating-menstrual-1837168822">Peakstock/ Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Birth <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-53409521">rates are</a> decreasing <a href="https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.TFRT.IN">worldwide</a>. In all European countries they’re even dropping below <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Fertility_statistics">population replacement levels</a>, which refers to the number of children needed per woman to keep a population stable. While these decreases might be due to many adults intentionally postponing when they have their first child – or actively choosing not to have children – an <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.08.001">increasing number of studies suggests</a> these don’t fully explain decreasing birth rates. Some research also indicates that decreasing fertility is a major contributing factor in this decline. </p>
<p>One factor linked to decreased fertility is the presence of industrial chemicals found in our environment. Much is known about the impact of these chemicals on <a href="https://theconversation.com/male-fertility-how-everyday-chemicals-are-destroying-sperm-counts-in-humans-and-animals-158097">male fertility</a>, but little research has looked into how they affect women. This is what our recent study sought to do. </p>
<p>We found that exposure to common chemical contaminants was associated with <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2021.106589">reduced egg counts</a> in the ovaries of reproductive-aged women. Though these chemicals have since been banned, they were once used in household products like flame retardants and mosquito sprays, and are still present in the environment and in foods like fatty fish.</p>
<h2>Fewer eggs</h2>
<p>We measured the levels of 31 common industrial chemicals, such as HCB (an agricultural fungicide) and DDT (an insecticide), in the blood of 60 women. To gauge their fertility, we measured the number of immature eggs they had in their ovaries by counting them in ovarian tissue samples using a microscope. Because ovaries are located inside the body and would require surgery to access, we chose pregnant women who were having a caesarean section, as this made it possible to access tissue samples without additional surgery. </p>
<p>We found that women with higher levels of chemicals in their blood sample also had fewer immature eggs left in their ovaries. We found significant connections between reduced egg numbers and certain chemicals, including PCB (used in coolants), DDE (a by-product of DDT) and PBDE (a flame retardant). As female fertility is <a href="https://academic.oup.com/humupd/article/8/2/141/624668">age-dependent</a>, we made sure to adjust our calculations accordingly depending on the age of the woman in question. This showed us that exposure to these chemicals resulted in fewer eggs for women of all ages.</p>
<p>We also found that women with higher chemical levels in their blood had to try for longer to get pregnant. For the women with the highest levels of chemicals in their blood, it took more than a year.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A woman holds a positive pregnancy test in her hand." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/403994/original/file-20210602-21-1wj7u03.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/403994/original/file-20210602-21-1wj7u03.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/403994/original/file-20210602-21-1wj7u03.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/403994/original/file-20210602-21-1wj7u03.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/403994/original/file-20210602-21-1wj7u03.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/403994/original/file-20210602-21-1wj7u03.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/403994/original/file-20210602-21-1wj7u03.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Those with the highest levels of chemicals took over a year to become pregnant.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/pregnancy-test-female-hand-on-blurred-620722475">Africa Studio/ Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Unlike men, women are only born with a <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK532300/">fixed set of immature eggs</a> in their ovaries, and cannot produce new ones after birth. A woman’s “reserve” (the number of eggs in her ovaries) naturally diminishes through monthly ovulations, as well as by normal follicle death. When depleted below a critical level, natural fertility ends and <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK532300/">menopause</a> begins. Our findings imply that toxic chemicals may speed up the disappearance of ovarian follicles, which could lead to reduced fertility and earlier menopause. </p>
<h2>Chemical soup</h2>
<p>We’re <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/biomonitoring/environmental_chemicals.html">exposed to industrial chemicals</a> through our food, the products we put on our skin, and even through our mothers while developing in the womb. </p>
<p>The number of industrial chemicals, as well as their abundance in the environment, has steadily <a href="https://www.who.int/ceh/publications/endocrine/en/">increased since the 1940s</a> – with devastating effects on <a href="https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/70148108">ecosystems</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12360">wildlife</a> and even <a href="https://theconversation.com/male-fertility-how-everyday-chemicals-are-destroying-sperm-counts-in-humans-and-animals-158097">human fertility</a>. Many chemicals were introduced to the market with <a href="https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2019/608866/IPOL_STU(2019)608866_EN.pdf">little testing for safety</a>. This has led to a situation where humans and the environment are exposed to an extensive “soup” of industrial chemicals.</p>
<p>So far, multiple chemicals have been found to be harmful to reproduction after only decades of consumer use. These include <a href="http://www.c8sciencepanel.org">PFAS</a> (the chemical used in Teflon, Scotch Guard, and firefighting foam), <a href="https://echa.europa.eu/-/endocrine-disrupting-properties-to-be-added-for-four-phthalates-in-the-authorisation-list">phthalates</a> (used in plastic packaging, medical equipment and soaps and shampoos), as well as <a href="https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/article-abstract/2659554">pesticides</a> and other <a href="https://www.fertstert.org/article/S0015-0282(19)31989-2/abstract">industrial chemicals</a> like PCBs. </p>
<p>The negative effects include <a href="https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Count-Down/Shanna-H-Swan/9781982113667">reduced sperm counts</a> in men, and potentially the ability of women to <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7721012/pdf/IUPS_125_1727073.pdf">become pregnant</a>. Our study is the first to investigate the link between chemical exposure and the number of eggs a woman has.</p>
<p>The chemicals we studied were all “persistent”, meaning they build up in the body over time. Strikingly, the chemicals that we found to be associated with lower egg counts were restricted by an <a href="http://www.pops.int">international treaty</a> decades ago. Yet because of <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/MEMO_03_219">their persistence</a>, they still contaminate the ecosystem and our food. </p>
<p>Interestingly, PCBs (one of the chemicals we studied) have also been connected to decreased sperm counts and <a href="https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/press/news/dioxins-and-related-pcbs-tolerable-intake-level-updated">infertility in men</a>. Simultaneous decreases in male and female fertility could make it more difficult for couples to get pregnant. </p>
<p>In future, researchers should investigate whether the fertility of all women – as opposed to pregnant women – is similarly affected by these chemicals. But these findings may encourage us to rethink chemical safety to take fertility into consideration during safety assessments. Avoiding certain foods (such as <a href="https://www.epa.gov/choose-fish-and-shellfish-wisely/fish-and-shellfish-advisories-and-safe-eating-guidelines">seafood</a>) and certain products (such as those we put on our skin and hair) may also help minimise the negative effects of chemicals on our chances of having a baby.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/161037/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Paulina receives funding from the Swedish Research Council, Swedish Research Council for Sustainable Development, Jane & Aatos Erkko Foundation, Karolinska Institutet funds and foundations, and the European Commission. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Richelle receives funding from Birgitta and Carl-Axel Rydbeck Research Foundation. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jasmin Hassan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The higher the chemical levels found in a woman’s blood, the fewer eggs they had left in their ovaries.Jasmin Hassan, PhD Candidate in Reproductive Medicine, Karolinska InstitutetPauliina Damdimopoulou, Senior Researcher, Chemicals and Female Fertility, Karolinska InstitutetRichelle Duque Björvang, PhD Candidate in Reproductive Medicine, Karolinska InstitutetLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1600072021-05-03T20:08:22Z2021-05-03T20:08:22ZAre chemicals shrinking your penis and depleting your sperm? Here’s what the evidence really says<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/398259/original/file-20210503-13-ocd03y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=14%2C0%2C4977%2C3323&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>A doomsday scenario of an end to human sperm production has been <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/18/toxic-chemicals-health-humanity-erin-brokovich">back in the news recently</a>, now with the added threat of shrinking penises.</p>
<p>Professor Shanna Swan, a US epidemiologist who studies environmental influences on human development, recently published a <a href="https://www.shannaswan.com/countdown">new book</a> called Countdown.</p>
<p>In it, she suggests sperm counts <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/mar/28/shanna-swan-fertility-reproduction-count-down">could reach zero by 2045</a>, largely owing to the impact of a range of environmental pollutants used in manufacturing everyday products: phthalates and bisphosphenol A (BPA) from plastics, and per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) used, for example, in waterproofing. Under this scenario, she says, most couples wanting to conceive would need to rely on assisted reproductive technologies.</p>
<p>She has also warned these chemicals are shrinking penis size.</p>
<p>Such extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I would argue the evidence is not strong enough.</p>
<h2>Correlation doesn’t equal causation</h2>
<p>Epidemiologists find associations between disease and potential contributing factors, like lung cancer and smoking. But their work can’t identify the causes of disease — just because two things are associated doesn’t mean one is causing, or caused by, the other.</p>
<p>An article written by environmental activist Erin Brockovich in <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/18/toxic-chemicals-health-humanity-erin-brokovich">The Guardian</a> in March leads by referring to “hormone-disrupting chemicals that are decimating fertility”. But causation is <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33385395/">far from established</a>. </p>
<p>It’s reasonable to expect chemicals that <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33385395/">affect hormone function</a> in our bodies, like BPA and PFAS, could affect reproduction in males and females, given available evidence. But we don’t have irrefutable proof.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A man and a pregnant woman outside with their dog." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/398265/original/file-20210503-17-fzbt4d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/398265/original/file-20210503-17-fzbt4d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398265/original/file-20210503-17-fzbt4d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398265/original/file-20210503-17-fzbt4d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398265/original/file-20210503-17-fzbt4d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398265/original/file-20210503-17-fzbt4d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398265/original/file-20210503-17-fzbt4d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Could environmental pollutants be leading to infertility? Establishing cause and effect isn’t clear-cut.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Selective reporting</h2>
<p>In 2017, Swan and several colleagues published <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28981654/">an exhaustive review study</a> showing an apparent drop in men’s sperm counts of 59.3% between 1973 and 2011. This research informs the arguments Swan makes in Countdown and those we’ve seen in the media.</p>
<p>What’s not often mentioned is the fact the researchers only observed a decline in sperm count in groups of men from North America, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand, but not in groups of men from South America, Asia or Africa.</p>
<p>When Swan and her colleagues combined the data from all countries, they saw a decline because the studies of “Western” men outweigh those of men elsewhere (in the number of studies and participants).</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/huge-drop-in-mens-sperm-levels-confirmed-by-new-study-here-are-the-facts-81582">Huge drop in men's sperm levels confirmed by new study – here are the facts</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Swan and her colleagues worked hard to avoid bias when conducting their study. But <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9455838/">selection bias</a> (related to how study participants are chosen), <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2406472/">publication bias</a> (resulting from researchers’ tendency to report only observations they think will be of interest) and other limitations of the original work used as the basis for their investigation could be influencing the results of the larger study.</p>
<p>Many studies from different parts of the world show declining sperm counts, which is concerning, but we don’t fully understand the <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32168194/">reasons for the apparent decline</a>. Blaming chemicals in the environment overlooks <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29774489/">other important factors</a> such as chronic disease, diet, and obesity, which people can act on to improve their fertility.</p>
<h2>The problem with extrapolation</h2>
<p>Swan’s 2017 study boils down to a straight descending line drawn between sperm counts of groups of men studied at different times between 1973 and 2011.</p>
<p>Just because a straight line can be drawn through the data, this doesn’t justify extrapolation of that line beyond its earliest and latest data points. It’s unscientific to assume trends in data exist outside the range of observations.</p>
<p>We know sperm counts of men in the early 1940s were around <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1393072/">113 million sperm per ml of semen</a>, not the roughly 140 million/ml you get from extrapolating backwards from Swan’s research. Concluding sperm counts will reach zero in 2045, based on extrapolating forward from the available data, is just as likely to be incorrect. </p>
<p>When Swan told <a href="https://www.axios.com/newsletters/axios-future-e58ada65-1a84-4550-afd8-79d698bb7d38.html?stream=future&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosfutureofwork&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter">news website Axios</a> “If you look at the curve on sperm count and project it forward” she was encouraging unjustifiable and unscientific interpretation of her data — even though she acknowledged it was “risky” to extrapolate in this way. Unfortunately this caution is too often unmentioned.</p>
<p>For example, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/18/toxic-chemicals-health-humanity-erin-brokovich">Brockovich writes</a>: “That would mean no babies. No reproduction. No more humans.” That’s hyperbole. It’s just not science.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="An illustration of sperm." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/398266/original/file-20210503-23-8j0tma.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/398266/original/file-20210503-23-8j0tma.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398266/original/file-20210503-23-8j0tma.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398266/original/file-20210503-23-8j0tma.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398266/original/file-20210503-23-8j0tma.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398266/original/file-20210503-23-8j0tma.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398266/original/file-20210503-23-8j0tma.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Swan has extrapolated from recent data to predict sperm counts could reach zero by 2045. But this isn’t necessarily accurate.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Relax, your penis isn’t shrinking</h2>
<p>Claims of shrinking penises are obvious clickbait. But only <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30403786/">a single study</a>, of 383 young men from the Veneto region in northeastern Italy, links men’s penis size to the types of chemicals Swan attributes to declining sperm counts.</p>
<p>Within Veneto there are <a href="https://figshare.com/articles/figure/Supplemental_Figure_1/7016234">geographic zones</a> with varied levels of PFAS contamination. A group of 212 men who live in areas with high or intermediate PFAS exposure and have high levels of these chemicals in their bodies, had an average penis length of 8.6cm, about 10% lower than the average of a group of 171 men from an area without exposure (9.7cm).</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/science-or-snake-oil-do-men-need-sperm-health-supplements-84379">Science or Snake Oil: do men need sperm health supplements?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>But a few features of this study affect the reliability of the observations and whether we can generalise them to other populations.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>men were grouped according to where they lived, not where they were born. Since genital size is <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30403786/">determined before birth</a>, the environment during their mothers’ pregnancies is more relevant to penis size than where the men lived at the time of the study. Some men will likely have relocated from their place of birth but how many, and where they may have moved to and from, we don’t know</p></li>
<li><p>the levels of PFAS exposure for men living in the contaminated regions of Veneto are extreme, because of <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29108835/">decades of industrial pollution</a>. How the potential effect of such large exposures relates to smaller and more common exposures to pollutants, like from plastic food wrap, we don’t know</p></li>
<li><p>the study is missing details about its subjects and the conditions under which measurements were made. It’s <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33748967/">usual</a> to exclude people with conditions that might affect study outcomes, such as congenital abnormalities, but it’s not clear whether this happened in the study. Variables that <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31171853/">influence penile measurements</a> (such as room temperature, posture, and whether the penis is held straight or hanging) are not mentioned.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>And from a semantic perspective, for penises to be “shrinking” they must be getting shorter over time, on either an individual or population basis. I cannot find any reports of men’s penises shortening as a consequence of environmental pollution. <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31171853/">Available data</a> <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25487360/">don’t suggest</a> a decline in penis size over the past few decades.</p>
<p>While environmental pollution is a pressing concern, the evidence suggests the catastrophic collapse of human reproduction and accompanying penis shrinkage is thankfully a pretty unlikely prospect.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/considering-using-ivf-to-have-a-baby-heres-what-you-need-to-know-108910">Considering using IVF to have a baby? Here's what you need to know</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/160007/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tim Moss is Health Content Manager at Healthy Male (formerly Andrology Australia). He is the current President of The Perinatal Society of Australia and New Zealand. </span></em></p>Warnings of an end to human sperm production have been making headlines recently, now with the added threat of shrinking penises. Is this science or sensationalism?Tim Moss, Adjunct Associate Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1558412021-02-26T13:25:21Z2021-02-26T13:25:21ZWhat are phthalates, and how do they put children’s health at risk?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/386581/original/file-20210225-19-1wfq2w3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C5362%2C3583&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Phthalates can be found in many common products and types of plastic packaging.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/plastic-bags-and-bottles-royalty-free-image/1127955502">Curtoicurto via Getty Images</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>You may not realize it, but you likely encounter phthalates <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/biomonitoring/Phthalates_FactSheet.html">every day</a>. These chemicals are found in many plastics, including food packaging, and they can migrate into food products during processing. They’re in personal care products like shampoos, soaps and laundry detergents, and in the vinyl flooring in many homes. </p>
<p>They’re also in the news again after an editorial by scientists in the <a href="https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/pdf/10.2105/AJPH.2020.306014">American Journal of Public Health</a> included an urgent call for better federal regulation of the chemicals.</p>
<p>In particular, scientists are urging state and federal agencies to eliminate phthalates (pronounced THAL-ates) from products used by pregnant women and children. Despite evidence of the harm these chemicals can cause, federal regulation in the United States has been minimal beyond <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/01/26/2018-01451/prohibition-of-childrens-toys-and-child-care-articles-containing-specified-phthalates-revision-of">children’s toys</a>. A recent move by the General Mills-owned food brand Annie’s to <a href="https://www.annies.com/faq/">eliminate phthalates from its macaroni and cheese</a> suggests stricter rules are feasible.</p>
<p>So, what’s the risk, and what can you do about it? </p>
<p>I’m an <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=wKXbh1UAAAAJ&hl=en">environmental epidemiologist</a> who studies the impact of pregnant women’s exposure to environmental chemicals. Here are answers to three important questions about phthalates.</p>
<h2>Who’s at risk?</h2>
<p>Ortho-phthalates, commonly referred to as phthalates, are synthetic chemicals that are used to manufacture plastic. They help make plastic more flexible and harder to break. </p>
<p>Despite their abundance in many products, phthalates can be harmful to <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412018329908">pregnant women</a> and <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935115001899?via%3Dihub">their children</a>. These chemicals can disrupt the endocrine system, the glands that release hormones as the body’s chemical messengers. Studies suggest that can lead to pregnant women <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412021000684">delivering their babies early</a>. Other studies have found that children born to mothers exposed to high levels of phthalates can have a <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935115001899?via%3Dihub">lower IQ</a> and poorer social communication development, and that these children are also more likely to develop <a href="https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/10.1289/EHP2358">ADHD</a> and <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0161813X18303255?via%3Dihub">behavior problems</a>. Researchers have also found effects on the <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1280349/">genital development of male infants</a> born to mothers exposed to phthalates during pregnancy.</p>
<p>While phthalates can be found in nearly everyone, <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412018329908">minority women have been found to be especially burdened</a>. Studies show that many <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2018.03.030">beauty products</a> targeted at these communities contain high levels of chemicals.</p>
<p><a href="http://doi.org/10.1097/MOP.0b013e32835e1eb6">Infants and young children</a> may experience high phthalate levels because they often put plastic products in their mouths as they explore the world.</p>
<p>Phthalates can enter food at <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/biomonitoring/Phthalates_FactSheet.html">many places</a> in the supply chain, including through plastic tubing for liquids during production, plastic storage containers and even food preparation gloves. Foods that are <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4050989/">high in fat</a> in particular can absorb phthalates through exposure during processing. Eating out doesn’t avoid the risk. A <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.02.029">study of U.S. children and adults</a> showed that those who ate food outside of their homes had higher phthalate levels.</p>
<h2>How do I know if a product has phthalates?</h2>
<p>Figuring out which products have high levels of phthalates isn’t always easy. While <a href="https://phthalates.americanchemistry.com/">phthalates</a> are required to be listed on ingredients labels, they are sometimes included instead as part of the fragrance, which <a href="https://www.safecosmetics.org/fragrance-disclosure/learn-more/trade-secrets/">allows them to be excluded</a> from the ingredients list. </p>
<p>Many companies have voluntarily removed phthalates, and many consumer products are now labeled “phthalate free.” The <a href="https://www.ewg.org/skindeep/">Environmental Working Group</a>’s Skin Deep website also offers a way to search for details about chemicals in cleaning and personal care products.</p>
<h2>How do I keep my family safe?</h2>
<p>Phthalates are <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/biomonitoring/Phthalates_FactSheet.html">rapidly metabolized</a> and generally removed from the body once exposure stops. Until there is better regulation, a few simple changes can make a big difference in promoting health and reducing phthalate levels in the home. </p>
<p>One <a href="http://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1003170">easy change</a> is to swap out all plastic food packaging containers with glass containers. If that’s not possible, it’s best to let food cool to room temperature before placing it in plastic food storage containers. </p>
<p>Don’t microwave anything in plastic, because phthalates can <a href="http://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph110100507">migrate from food storage containers</a> into food. </p>
<p>You can also reduce phthalate exposure by checking labels to avoid using products that include phthalates, by <a href="http://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1003170">eating less processed food</a> that might have absorbed phthalates during production, and by cooking more meals at home.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/155841/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Stephanie Eick does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Scientists issued an urgent call for better federal regulation of these endocrine-disrupting chemicals. Here’s what you can do to reduce your family’s risk.Stephanie Eick, Postdoctoral Researcher in Reproductive Health, University of California, San FranciscoLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1469882020-10-28T17:29:11Z2020-10-28T17:29:11ZRather than recalling unsafe products, why not ensure they’re safe in the first place?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/366046/original/file-20201028-13-8mdfad.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=50%2C75%2C5615%2C3657&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The death of Brittney Conway, the three-year-old Gold Coast girl killed <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-23/gold-coast-family-calls-for-mandatory-button-battery-regulation/12797326">by swallowing a button battery</a>, has again drawn attention to deaths and injuries caused by consumer goods – and to a longstanding deficiency in Australia’s consumer safety laws.</p>
<p>About 20 Australian children a week are hospitalised due to swallowing batteries, and three have died since 2013. Preventing such cases was one of the <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/about-us/australian-competition-consumer-commission/product-safety-priorities-2019">top product safety priorities</a> of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission in 2019. </p>
<p>In 2019 a total of about 780 Australians were killed by consumer products, and a further 52,000 injured, according to the <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/over-a-million-recalled-products-still-in-circulation-in-australia">consumer watchdog</a>. </p>
<p>Misadventure can never be eliminated, but more safety measures could be implemented. Product makers, for example, could ensure small batteries cannot be easily removed from devices by children. </p>
<p>Consider the 31,000 LED wristbands distributed to spectators at the AFL grand final in Bribane last Saturday. The AFL <a href="https://www.productsafety.gov.au/recall/australian-football-league-promotional-led-wristband">issued a safety recall on Tuesday</a>, days after child safety group <a href="https://www.facebook.com/KidsafeQld/posts/4673614532710717">Kidsafe Queensland warned</a> the wristband’s battery compartment, containing two button batteries, was not adequately secured. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="The promotional LED PixMob wristband recalled by the Australian Football Commission." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/366057/original/file-20201028-21-b80lnb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/366057/original/file-20201028-21-b80lnb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=321&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/366057/original/file-20201028-21-b80lnb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=321&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/366057/original/file-20201028-21-b80lnb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=321&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/366057/original/file-20201028-21-b80lnb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=404&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/366057/original/file-20201028-21-b80lnb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=404&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/366057/original/file-20201028-21-b80lnb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=404&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The promotional LED PixMob wristband recalled by the Australian Football Commission.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.productsafety.gov.au/recall/australian-football-league-promotional-led-wristband">www.productsafety.gov.au</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The problem, as acknowledged in March 2019 by the <a href="https://www.productsafety.gov.au/news/unsafe-goods-should-be-illegal-to-sell">consumer watchdog’s head, Rod Sims</a>, is that it is generally not against consumer protection regulations to supply unsafe goods in Australia. </p>
<p>Only <a href="https://www.productsafety.gov.au/product-safety-laws/safety-standards-bans/mandatory-standards">a select list of about 44 product types</a> are regulated by mandatory safety standards. These include things such as aquatic equipment, bicycle gear, cots, prams, toys for children aged three and under, and all toys containing magnets, lead and other hazardous elements.</p>
<p>But for thousands of other products, the <a href="https://consumerlaw.gov.au/">Australian Consumer Law</a> (ACL) is reactive. Regulators can act only after a problem becomes apparent and enough people are actually or potentially injured or killed. </p>
<p>Sims spelled out the fix by calling on Australian law makers to follow European and other nations by introducing a “general safety provision” obliging firms to be proactive, not reactive, in ensuring they supply safe products.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/button-batteries-kill-heres-how-we-can-prevent-needless-child-deaths-from-battery-ingestion-101187">Button batteries kill. Here's how we can prevent needless child deaths from battery ingestion</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Moving from reaction to prevention</h2>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/366064/original/file-20201028-21-1c151vm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Sleeping with the Enemy recalled its Summer Mini-Personalised Sleepwear range on October 6 2020" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/366064/original/file-20201028-21-1c151vm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/366064/original/file-20201028-21-1c151vm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=790&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/366064/original/file-20201028-21-1c151vm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=790&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/366064/original/file-20201028-21-1c151vm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=790&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/366064/original/file-20201028-21-1c151vm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=992&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/366064/original/file-20201028-21-1c151vm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=992&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/366064/original/file-20201028-21-1c151vm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=992&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Sleeping with the Enemy recalled its Summer Mini-Personalised Sleepwear range on October 6 2020. The garments pose a fire risk to the wearer.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.productsafety.gov.au/recall/sleeping-with-the-enemy-summer-mini-personalised-sleepwear">www.productsafety.gov.au</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Currently, for any product not covered by <a href="https://www.productsafety.gov.au/product-safety-laws/safety-standards-bans/mandatory-standards">mandatory safety standards</a>, Australian suppliers tend to voluntarily recall items found to be unsafe. They do this mainly to avoid compensation claims and reputational risk.</p>
<p>Those harmed can pursue compensation from sellers for breaching consumer guarantees or from manufacturers for product liability. But even big <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/business/consumer-affairs/after-the-high-court-threw-out-the-anz-bank-fee-case-are-class-actions-cactus-20160729-gqgcpm.html">class-action</a> law firms tend to find it easier to bring claims for investors rather than customers. </p>
<p>The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission can also ban products found to be dangerous, with <a href="https://www.productsafety.gov.au/product-safety-laws/safety-standards-bans/product-bans">19 products</a> currently on its list. These include plastic children’s items containing the <a href="https://www.productsafety.gov.au/bans/dehp-in-childrens-plastic-items">chemical diethylhexyl phthalate</a> (DEHP), combustible candle holders and gas masks containing asbestos.</p>
<p>But all this remains a <a href="https://www.choice.com.au/shopping/consumer-rights-and-advice/your-rights/articles/support-grows-for-a-general-safety-provision">reactive response</a>. Suppliers are only indirectly incentivised to market safe products. </p>
<figure class="align-left zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/366075/original/file-20201028-13-kum5ta.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Bubs & Me Boutique recalled this dummy chain on October 26 2020" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/366075/original/file-20201028-13-kum5ta.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/366075/original/file-20201028-13-kum5ta.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=1355&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/366075/original/file-20201028-13-kum5ta.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=1355&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/366075/original/file-20201028-13-kum5ta.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=1355&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/366075/original/file-20201028-13-kum5ta.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1703&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/366075/original/file-20201028-13-kum5ta.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1703&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/366075/original/file-20201028-13-kum5ta.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1703&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Bubs & Me Boutique recalled this dummy chain on October 26 2020. It poses a strangulation hazard.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.productsafety.gov.au/recall/bubs-me-boutique-dummy-chains">www.productsafety.gov.au</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>A general safety provision, backed by financial penalties and other regulatory powers, would require them to supply only safe products, taking into factors such as consumer expectations and industry best practices. </p>
<p>Britain has had such a provision since 1987, and the European Union since 1992. Hong Kong, Macau, Malaysia, Canada and Singapore have <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3551793">followed suit</a>. </p>
<p>Adding a general safety provision to Australian law was canvassed by Productivity Commission inquiries in <a href="https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/consumer-product-safety">2006</a> and <a href="https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/consumer-policy/report">2008</a>. These found insufficient evidence benefits would outweigh costs, so other legislative reforms should be tried first. </p>
<p>But the 2017 final report of the government’s <a href="https://consumerlaw.gov.au/consultations-and-reviews/australian-consumer-law-review">review of the ACL</a> reached a different conclusion. Noting the Australian market for consumer goods had changed significantly, with many more low-cost imports, it recommended an “overarching general obligation” on traders to ensure the safety of their products.</p>
<p>A general safety provision, the report said, would place “a clear onus” on traders to ensure the safety of the products they sold to Australian consumers: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>It would shift responsibility for managing product safety risks from consumers and regulators to traders who are better placed to control those risks at the design and manufacturing stage of a product’s life.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The annual economic cost of deaths and injuries from unsafe consumer is at least A$4.5 billion, estimates the Australian Treasury (which in October 2019 <a href="https://consult.treasury.gov.au/market-and-competition-policy-division-internal/main-consultation/">sought submissions</a> on reform options including a general safety provision). This assumes a “value of a statistical life year” of about A$200,000 for premature deaths and disability. There are also A$500 million in direct hospital costs, and further costs associated with minor injuries and property loss.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/australian-consumer-law-is-failing-beer-drinkers-85260">Australian consumer law is failing beer drinkers</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Australia is lagging behind other nations</h2>
<p>My own <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7283989/">research</a> (and <a href="https://erga-omnes.sydney.edu.au/2019/10/improving-the-effectiveness-of-the-consumer-product-safety-system-australia-in-international-comparative-context/">submission</a> to the Treasury) provide evidence supporting a general safety provision. </p>
<p>First, the <a href="https://globalrecalls.oecd.org/">OECD Global Recalls</a> portal (which tracks product recalls around the world) shows Australia had higher per capita voluntary recalls than Korea, Britain, Japan and the US between 2017 and 2019. Canada’s recall rate was similar, but it has a <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1600502">more stringent duty on suppliers</a> to report product accidents to regulators compared with Australia. </p>
<p>This suggests relatively more unsafe products are making it to market in Australia. About 40% of those recalls involve child products, of which around 60% come from China.</p>
<p>Second, the number of annual recalls has been rising in Australia, as shown by figures compiled by peak advocacy group <a href="https://www.choice.com.au/-/media/df52380f2b9c4e33a239eb82c1dd8216.ashx?la=en">Choice</a> from <a href="https://www.productsafety.gov.au/recalls">government data</a>. The increase from about 2011 is in line with burgeoning online shopping. Greater e-commerce due to the COVID-19 pandemic may add to the numbers.</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/366123/original/file-20201028-13-hglarh.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/366123/original/file-20201028-13-hglarh.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/366123/original/file-20201028-13-hglarh.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=406&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/366123/original/file-20201028-13-hglarh.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=406&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/366123/original/file-20201028-13-hglarh.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=406&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/366123/original/file-20201028-13-hglarh.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=511&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/366123/original/file-20201028-13-hglarh.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=511&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/366123/original/file-20201028-13-hglarh.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=511&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<hr>
<p>Further analysis by <a href="https://eprints.qut.edu.au/197226/">Catherine Niven and colleagues</a> shows Australian recalls of children’s products increased 88% from 2011 to 2017 (US recalls decreased by 21%). Just as alarmingly, almost two-thirds of the recalls involved products not complying with specific mandatory standards (also demonstrated by two recent recalls pictured above). </p>
<h2>Time to put safety first</h2>
<p>Regulators could seek to sanction local suppliers more for such non-compliance with existing law. </p>
<p>But introducing a broader general safety provision would create a <a href="https://productsafetysolutions.com.au/new-product-safety-laws-being-considered/">paradigm shift</a> in how companies deal with safety. </p>
<p>Manufacturers, distributors and retailers would need to think more carefully about (and document) safety assessments before putting products into circulation. </p>
<p>This is more efficient and safer than releasing products and then trying to recall them after problems start to be reported, hoping not too many consumers get harmed. It would also encourage businesses to “<a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3398046">trade up</a>” to the standards expected in many of our trading partners. </p>
<p>Choice has confirmed many Australians <a href="https://www.choice.com.au/shopping/consumer-rights-and-advice/your-rights/articles/weak-product-safety-laws-in-australia">wrongly assume</a> we already have a general safety provision. </p>
<p>It’s time to improve the law to avoid confusion and send better signals to suppliers.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/146988/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Luke Nottage receives funding from the Australian Research Council: DP170103136, "Evaluating consumer product regulatory responses to improve child safety". He provides occasional pro bono advice to Choice regarding consumer law and policy reform, and acknowledges assistance from Choice and Catherine Niven in compiling the graph reproduced here charting Australia's annual recalls from 1998 to 2019.</span></em></p>Australian needs a ‘general safety provision’ that obliges firms to be proactive, not reactive, in ensuring they supply safe consumer products.Luke Nottage, Professor, Sydney Law School, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1181522019-11-21T13:58:23Z2019-11-21T13:58:23ZNail salon workers suffer chemical exposures that can be like working at a garage or a refinery<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/294623/original/file-20190927-185403-1nhy7sj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The chemicals in nail products put nail salon workers at risk for cancer and other illnesses. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Angie Chung/Flickr</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Anyone who has walked past a nail salon is familiar with the noxious odors that emanate from acrylic nails, polishes and removers. Customers getting manicures and pedicures endure the smell temporarily, but manicurists who inhale these evaporating chemicals for hours expose themselves to health risks. </p>
<p>The smells come from volatile organic compounds, or VOCs – compounds that <a href="https://toxtown.nlm.nih.gov/chemicals-and-contaminants/volatile-organic-compounds-vocs">easily become vapors or gases</a>. These substances have been <a href="https://www.epa.gov/indoor-air-quality-iaq/volatile-organic-compounds-impact-indoor-air-quality#Health_Effects">linked to health problems</a> ranging from headaches and respiratory irritation to reproductive complications and cancer. In a normal room-temperature environment, VOCs evaporate and humans breathe them in. </p>
<p>Our research team, along with colleagues at Colorado State University, recently investigated <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2019.03.086">chemical exposures in six Colorado nail salons</a> and found that employees spent their days exposed to high levels of VOCs. Participating technicians, who had worked in salons for up to 19 years, reported suffering headaches and skin and eye irritation. </p>
<p>We measured levels of benzene and formaldehyde in the salons, and determined that exposure to these known human carcinogens was increasing the workers’ lifetime cancer risks above one in one million – the level that <a href="https://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/iwachap10.pdf">many U.S. agencies consider acceptable</a> in regulating exposure to harmful substances.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/R20A0iQYc4o?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Nail salon workers in New York City rally for safer working conditions.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Identifying health hazards</h2>
<p>A 2015 <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/10/nyregion/at-nail-salons-in-nyc-manicurists-are-underpaid-and-unprotected.html">New York Times exposé</a> highlighted underpayment and poor working conditions in New York nail salons. However, it failed to address chemical exposures that salon workers experience daily.</p>
<p>Several research groups have sought to <a href="https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2010.300099">characterize</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/09603123.2012.755152">quantify</a> VOC exposures <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-018-1353-0">in the nail salon environment</a>, using standard measurement techniques and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10903-007-9084-4">self-reported health surveys</a>. Their research shows that nail salon workers are exposed to higher levels of VOCs than they would typically be expected to encounter in most homes, occupations or urban environments. As a result, these workers frequently experience work-related health symptoms.</p>
<p>Our study measured 10 VOCs, including the carcinogens <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2019.03.086">benzene and formaldehyde</a>. We found that VOC levels in the six salons where we monitored regularly exceeded common threshold levels for <a href="https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/iris_drafts/atoz.cfm?list_type=alpha">odor and inhalation risk</a>. In some cases this posed a significant risk of cancer over a 20-year exposure period.</p>
<p>Twenty workers answered questionnaires about their personal health. Among them, 70% reported some form of short-term health symptom related to their employment, while 40% reported multiple related symptoms.</p>
<p>We worked closely with salon owners to enlist volunteer nail technicians to participate. Having owners’ support was instrumental, since it allowed salon workers to accurately report on their health and working conditions without fear of reprisal. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"311522432605372416"}"></div></p>
<h2>Like working at an oil refinery</h2>
<p>Many people view cosmetology as a relatively safe profession, but it isn’t. We found that exposures to aromatic hydrocarbons like benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylenes – collectively referred to as BTEX – resembled those previously reported in studies of <a href="https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Ambient-Air-Quality-Monitoring-in-Terms-of-Volatile-Singh-Ramteke/7089e7068ccb85bca9d05f36598e2b5fb92ae910">oil refinery workers</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/10807031003670071">auto garage technicians</a>. </p>
<p>Our results aren’t unique. A 2018 Iranian study found similar concentrations of benzene, ethylbenzene, and xylene in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s12995-018-0213-x">Tehran beauty salons</a>. Another study conducted that year in Michigan found concentrations of toluene at <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-018-1353-0">over 100 parts per billion</a>, which is roughly 30 times higher than <a href="https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-09/documents/toluene.pdf">reported urban outdoor levels</a>.</p>
<p>Regulation of this kind of workplace exposure has not kept pace with science. Many U.S. occupational safety and health exposure limits have not been updated <a href="https://ohsonline.com/Articles/2014/12/01/Can-OSHA-Update-the-PELs.aspx">for nearly 50 years</a>. The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, or OSHA, readily acknowledges that many of its permissible exposure limits are “<a href="https://www.osha.gov/dsg/annotated-pels/">outdated and inadequate</a> for ensuring protection of worker health.” </p>
<p>OSHA offers only guidance and recommendations for businesses, effectively shifting the burden of worker protection onto private industry. This is especially problematic in the nail salon industry, where over 90% of salons are small businesses that <a href="https://www.labor.ucla.edu/publication/nail-files/">employ fewer than 5 people</a> and do not have safety personnel on staff. </p>
<p>Inadequate cosmetic product regulations and labeling requirements make it hard to know which products are actually safe. A 2012 study by the California Environmental Protection Agency found that 10 out of 12 nail products labeled “toluene free” still contained <a href="https://dtsc.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/31/2018/04/DTSC-Summary-of-Data-Findings-from-Testing-a-Limited-Number-of-Nail-Products-April-2012.pdf">up to 17% toluene</a>. Products labeled free of the so-called “toxic three” ingredients – dibutyl phthalate or DBP, toluene and formaldehyde – actually contained <a href="https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/nailsalons/chemicalhazards.html#resources">greater concentrations of DBP</a>, an endocrine-disrupting compound, than products that made no claims at all.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/301604/original/file-20191113-77326-6pwnbo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/301604/original/file-20191113-77326-6pwnbo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/301604/original/file-20191113-77326-6pwnbo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=390&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/301604/original/file-20191113-77326-6pwnbo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=390&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/301604/original/file-20191113-77326-6pwnbo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=390&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/301604/original/file-20191113-77326-6pwnbo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=490&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/301604/original/file-20191113-77326-6pwnbo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=490&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/301604/original/file-20191113-77326-6pwnbo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=490&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Options for managing toxic exposures in the workplace.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/hazardoustoxicsubstances/control.html">OSHA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Solving the problem</h2>
<p>Owners often work in nail salons, so they generally support efforts to improve air quality inside their businesses. Those who we interviewed typically had some understanding of the problem and wanted to fix it, but didn’t always know how. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-05/documents/nailsalonguide.pdf">U.S. Environmental Protection Agency</a>, the <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/99-112/pdfs/99-112.pdf?id=10.26616/NIOSHPUB99112">National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health</a> and <a href="https://www.osha.gov/Publications/3542nail-salon-workers-guide.pdf">OSHA</a> all publish healthy nail salon guides. Yet owners in our study had never heard of them – perhaps because the guides are only published in English, while many nail salon workers are Asian and Latino immigrants with limited English language skills.</p>
<p>Several grassroots community organizations have published guides to improving salons’ air quality in both <a href="https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5783e9b9be6594e480435ffe/t/58f447f903596ebd7ca8f6f3/1492404219566/Nail-Salon-Booklet-FINAL-Vietnamese-March-26-2014-adjusted-for-color-copier-and-single-pages.pdf">Vietnamese</a> and <a href="https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5783e9b9be6594e480435ffe/t/58f447e386e6c023e6aff51c/1492404197241/Chinese-FINAL-Version-2-2012.pdf">Chinese</a>. These references discuss ventilation and use of personal protective equipment, which are paramount for mitigating chemical exposures in the workplace. </p>
<p>Small changes, such as running ventilation continuously, wearing <a href="http://safety-zone.com/products/nitrile-gloves/">nitrile gloves</a> and utilizing proper <a href="https://www.firstaidglobal.com/product-page/carbon-filter-masks-n95-with-exhalation-valve">charcoal face masks</a>, can significantly reduce worker exposure. Results from <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.106499">our most recent study</a> also suggest that placing large activated carbon sinks in salons could effectively remove VOCs from the air. We are currently experimenting with embedding these chemical-absorbing materials into <a href="https://cen.acs.org/environment/pollution/Environmental-engineer-Lupita-Montoya-scrutinizes/97/i32">pieces of art</a> that can hang on salon walls.</p>
<p>Another priority is conveying information to larger audiences and advocating for more safety training in cosmetology certification programs. Education and training are particularly important for ethnic minority groups.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/299354/original/file-20191029-183151-1ouw8w0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/299354/original/file-20191029-183151-1ouw8w0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=419&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/299354/original/file-20191029-183151-1ouw8w0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=419&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/299354/original/file-20191029-183151-1ouw8w0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=419&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/299354/original/file-20191029-183151-1ouw8w0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=527&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/299354/original/file-20191029-183151-1ouw8w0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=527&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/299354/original/file-20191029-183151-1ouw8w0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=527&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Lan-Anh Truong, right, who owns a nail salon in Alameda County, California was honored in 2016 for her efforts in a grassroots campaign to improve conditions for workers.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Eric Risberg/AP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Many workplace standards enforced by OSHA, such as those regulating exposure to toxic and hazardous substances, <a href="https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/nailsalons/standards.html">apply to nail salons</a>. However, cosmetic manufacturers are <a href="https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetics-laws-regulations/fda-authority-over-cosmetics-how-cosmetics-are-not-fda-approved-are-fda-regulated#Who_is_responsible">not required</a> to obtain federal approval for products or ingredients before they go on the market, or to file product information with the agency. </p>
<p>In contrast, California passed a bill in 2018 that will require manufacturers to <a href="https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180AB2775">provide ingredient labels</a> on any professional cosmetic products manufactured after July 1, 2020 and sold in the state. The campaign for this common-sense reform was largely led by advocacy groups like the <a href="https://cahealthynailsalons.org/">California Healthy Nail Salon Collaborative</a>. Practical steps like this can improve conditions for workers who receive little attention but are exposed to serious health risks on the job every day.</p>
<p>[ <em>Deep knowledge, daily.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=deepknowledge">Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter</a>. ]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/118152/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Lupita Montoya received funding from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health and from the University of Colorado.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Aaron Lamplugh receives funding from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health</span></em></p>The technician who gave you that shiny manicure may be inhaling dangerous levels of toxic chemicals on the job.Lupita D. Montoya, Research Associate, Civil, Environmental and Architectural Engineering Department, University of Colorado BoulderAaron Lamplugh, Research Scientist, Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado BoulderLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/975142018-08-14T10:30:46Z2018-08-14T10:30:46ZWe are guinea pigs in a worldwide experiment on microplastics<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/227641/original/file-20180713-27045-11g61wx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Microplastics in the Mediterranean Sea.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/microplastics-mediterran-sea-1115773907">By Dirk Wahn/shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>One of the main problems with plastics is that although we may only need them fleetingly – seconds in the case of microbeads in personal care products, or minutes as in plastic grocery bags – they stick around for hundreds of years. Unfortunately, much of this plastic ends up as environmental pollution. We’ve all seen the gruesome images of a <a href="http://www.newsweek.com/plastic-pollution-bigger-threat-sea-turtles-oil-spills-752585">sea turtle killed by a plastic bag</a>, or the array of bottle caps, toothbrush fragments, and other plastic items <a href="http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/364/1526.cover-expansion">found in the stomach of an albatross carcass</a>. But what about the tiny microplastics that aren’t as readily visible? </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228490/original/file-20180719-142420-15af66e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228490/original/file-20180719-142420-15af66e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=460&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228490/original/file-20180719-142420-15af66e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=460&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228490/original/file-20180719-142420-15af66e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=460&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228490/original/file-20180719-142420-15af66e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=578&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228490/original/file-20180719-142420-15af66e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=578&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228490/original/file-20180719-142420-15af66e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=578&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A black footed albatross chick with plastics in its stomach lies dead on Midway Atoll in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands. Midway sits amid a collection of man-made debris called the Great Pacific Garbage Patch. Along the paths of Midway, there are piles of feathers with rings of plastic in the middle - remnants of birds that died with the plastic in their guts.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/New-Battle-Of-Midway/d6f07a9a658847ca9fba3fea3f9569a5/1/0">Dan Clark/USFWS via AP</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Much of the hundreds of millions of tons of plastic waste in our oceans is made up of <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2017.01.082">microplastics</a>. These are defined as plastic beads, fibers or fragments with a diameter of less than five thousand micrometers (μm), equal to one-half centimeter. Nanoplastics are thousands of times tinier, with a diameter of less than 0.1 μm, and are also likely to be widely present. By comparison, a human hair ranges from about 15 to 180 μm across. Some of these microplastics are deliberately engineered like microbeads in a facial scrub. Others result from the break down of larger plastic items. </p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/231900/original/file-20180814-2906-lgk87z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/231900/original/file-20180814-2906-lgk87z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/231900/original/file-20180814-2906-lgk87z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=599&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231900/original/file-20180814-2906-lgk87z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=599&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231900/original/file-20180814-2906-lgk87z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=599&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231900/original/file-20180814-2906-lgk87z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=753&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231900/original/file-20180814-2906-lgk87z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=753&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231900/original/file-20180814-2906-lgk87z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=753&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Stop ocean plastic pollution. Ban the microplastic beads in personal hygiene products like toothpaste and cosmetics.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-vector/stop-ocean-plastic-pollutionban-beadsreduce-reuse-715037593?src=PjJW9dZCI6mIebk2hqgu3w-3-58">By Supriya07/shutterstock.com</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>I’m an environmental epidemiologist with a <a href="https://sites.google.com/a/umich.edu/meekerlab/home">research group</a> that studies exposure to chemicals commonly found in consumer products, including plastics, and how they affect human reproduction and development. Microplastics interest me because they are now turning up everywhere and we know virtually nothing about how they might impact human health. So are these tiny pieces of plastic damaging our bodies? </p>
<h2>There are plastics and then the chemicals that are added to them</h2>
<p><a href="http://www.thisisplastics.com/plastics-101/what-are-the-different-types-of-plastic/">There are numerous types of commonly used plastics</a> with differing structures, properties, and chemical additives to make them stronger, more flexible, more rigid, more resilient to UV, or to prevent microbial growth or the spread of fire. Over the past couple of decades concern has grown over the potential danger to human health posed by unavoidable exposures to plastic additives. Because these substances are not chemically bound to the plastic, they leach from the products in which they are used. </p>
<p>Certain chemicals – phthalates, bisphenol A, flame retardants – added to plastics to provide beneficial qualities may in turn disrupt hormones or other important functions following exposure. This <a href="https://doi.org/10.1210/er.2015-1093">could further lead to adverse reproductive and developmental effects or cancer</a>. To date, most of the concerns for human health has focused on these additives in the plastics but not the plastics themselves.</p>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228500/original/file-20180719-142428-5xiywz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228500/original/file-20180719-142428-5xiywz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228500/original/file-20180719-142428-5xiywz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228500/original/file-20180719-142428-5xiywz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228500/original/file-20180719-142428-5xiywz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228500/original/file-20180719-142428-5xiywz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228500/original/file-20180719-142428-5xiywz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Bisphenol A (BPA) is commonly used in rigid polycarbonate plastics such as water cooler bottles.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/Search?query=5-gallon+water+cooler+bottle&ss=10&st=kw&entitysearch=&toItem=21&orderBy=Newest&searchMediaType=allmedia">By nikkytok/shutterstock.com</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Recent studies have reported on the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s1135">ecotoxicity of microplastics</a>. They <a href="https://doi.org/10.1021/es400663f">harm microscopic aquatic creatures called zooplankton</a> by becoming embedded after ingestion, and they also adhere to seaweed, fish and eggs that marine animals eat, causing these plastics to move up the food web. Among certain small marine species, microplastics have been shown to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.03.046">reduce growth, hinder reproduction, and shorten the lifespan</a>. </p>
<p>A drop in the size or health of these smaller organism populations could have significant ripple effects throughout the food chain. Laboratory toxicology experiments, particularly among mammals, are few but have shown that high doses of microplastics <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.03.051">adversely impacted liver function</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/srep46687">altered metabolism and other important biological reactions in mice, and tended to gather in certain tissues in a manner that was related to the size of the particles </a>. Furthermore, once in the environment microplastics can preferentially bind to, and subsequently serve as a vehicle for, other harmful chemicals such as toxic persistent organic pollutants and pathogens such as Vibrio spp, which causes food poisoning. </p>
<h2>Microplastics, microplastics everywhere</h2>
<p>As for <a href="https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b00423">human exposure</a>, no direct studies have been conducted but microplastics have been found in virtually all bodies of water on the planet, and on agricultural lands. They have been found in shellfish, sea salt, honey, beer, tap water, bottled water, and even air. Thus, ingestion and inhalation of microplastics are of concern as routes of exposure. </p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228481/original/file-20180719-142423-1gte5gt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228481/original/file-20180719-142423-1gte5gt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228481/original/file-20180719-142423-1gte5gt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=490&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228481/original/file-20180719-142423-1gte5gt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=490&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228481/original/file-20180719-142423-1gte5gt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=490&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228481/original/file-20180719-142423-1gte5gt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=615&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228481/original/file-20180719-142423-1gte5gt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=615&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228481/original/file-20180719-142423-1gte5gt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=615&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">In this, 2017 photo, a possible plastic microfiber is shown through a microscope during an examination of nearby ocean water in Key Largo, Fla. Gulf Coast researchers are preparing to launch a two-year study to see what kinds of microscopic plastics can be found in the waters from south Texas to the Florida Keys.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Plastics-Pollution/3d1cddffe88e44e385a02ac4dceb4b45/105/0">Wilfredo Lee/AP Photo</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The uptake, distribution, accumulation (and interaction with tissues and organs), metabolism, elimination, and ultimate toxicity of microplastics in the body will depend on many factors. These factors include size, shape, type of plastic, surface properties, biopersistence, and the presence of chemical additives or other toxic agents the microplastics may have picked up the environment. </p>
<p>Given that human exposure to microplastics is widespread, results from animal studies are certainly a cause for concern and an important factor for risk assessment. But, alas, lab animals and wildlife are often not accurate proxies for what might happen in humans due to differences among species or exposure scenarios. </p>
<p>In addition, unlike in clinical trials for a new drug, it is not ethical for us to randomly assign groups of people for treatment – microplastics, for example – or placebo and modulate dose levels to see how exposures might impact human health. So we are left with observational epidemiology studies, which can be messy to conduct and are by definition reactive and unable to fully prove causation. There are different types of observational studies but we generally measure exposures, health outcomes, and other relevant information as best we can within a group of people who are going about their lives, and then look for statistical relationships in the collected data. </p>
<h2>The worldwide plastic experiment</h2>
<p>In the worst case, workers who are exposed to high levels of toxicants as part of their job become sentinel species, and people in our communities are perceived as guinea pigs while scientists wait and watch for what might happen as exposures occur.</p>
<p>There are many <a href="https://www.epa.gov/asbestos/learn-about-asbestos">historical</a> and <a href="https://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/page/michigans_water_crisis_pfas.html">recent</a> examples of environmental threats that we identified after it was too late. Likewise, because exposures to microplastics are already occurring we need to consider how we can measure the effects on human health and act quickly to better understand the issue so it can be addressed appropriately. As an epidemiologist I know this certainly won’t be easy. </p>
<p>Which individuals and populations are exposed to high levels of microplastics? How is the exposure happening? How can we measure or estimate exposure? What aspect of the plastic is most relevant - is it size, shape or chemical makeup of these plastics? Or is it the toxicants or pathogens that attach to them? Or all of the above? What health effects are of most concern? What life stages are most sensitive to exposure? Is the fetus most at risk? Or are adolescents? Or people with preexisting conditions? Is duration of exposure, peak exposure, or cumulative exposure most important? How do health risks from plastic microparticles compare to the health and safety benefits of plastic? </p>
<p>To help us answer these questions, scientists who study exposures to chemicals, environmental epidemiologists, and other researchers need to utilize and stretch their various techniques, tools, and study designs to explore each of these smaller questions to figure out whether microplastics are harmful to human health. It could take many years or even decades before we are able to get a firm grasp of whether microplastics are toxic to humans. </p>
<h2>Shifting from plastics to green alternatives</h2>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228494/original/file-20180719-142417-3euxl4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228494/original/file-20180719-142417-3euxl4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228494/original/file-20180719-142417-3euxl4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=382&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228494/original/file-20180719-142417-3euxl4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=382&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228494/original/file-20180719-142417-3euxl4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=382&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228494/original/file-20180719-142417-3euxl4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=480&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228494/original/file-20180719-142417-3euxl4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=480&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228494/original/file-20180719-142417-3euxl4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=480&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Shoppers holding non-plastic carry bags walk during rains at a market in Mumbai, India, Saturday, June 23, 2018. India’s western state of Maharashtra enforced its state-wide ban on a wide range of single-use plastic items.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/India-Plastic-Ban/15094c8a02384f75a02a49430e4d5b31/3/0">Rajanish Kakade / AP Photo</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Whether or not we ever find adverse human health effects in association with microplastics, it’s clear we must take <a href="https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2018/06/plastic-planet-solutions-waste-pollution/?beta=true">action</a> to reduce the amount and toll of plastics on our environment. In addition to remediation efforts for the massive amount of plastic pollution already out there, better materials design through greater application of <a href="https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/greenchemistry/what-is-green-chemistry/principles/12-principles-of-green-chemistry.html">green chemistry principles</a> is one positive step we can take. We can also reduce single-use plastics, introduce effective recycling programs on a global scale, and implement policies at the national level, like <a href="https://www.fda.gov/Cosmetics/GuidanceRegulation/LawsRegulations/ucm531849.htm">phasing out microbeads</a> or banning certain additives, or locally at the <a href="http://www.ncsl.org/research/environment-and-natural-resources/plastic-bag-legislation.aspx">city, county, or state level</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228482/original/file-20180719-142420-f7ra0q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228482/original/file-20180719-142420-f7ra0q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228482/original/file-20180719-142420-f7ra0q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228482/original/file-20180719-142420-f7ra0q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228482/original/file-20180719-142420-f7ra0q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228482/original/file-20180719-142420-f7ra0q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228482/original/file-20180719-142420-f7ra0q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">United Nations Environment head Erik Solheim receives an AVAAZ petition signed by over one million people urging action to reduce plastic pollution in the world’s oceans, Tuesday, June 6, 2017, at U.N. Headquarters.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/AVAAZ-Delivers-a-One-Million-Signature-Petition-/5f3c3812961e4b2e98bb08ad136ba478/96/0">Jason DeCrow/AP Photo</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>There is no question that synthetic plastics have made our lives safer and more convenient over the past half-century or so – keeping foods fresh, providing crucial parts for cars and aircraft, preventing electronics from starting or spreading fires, contributing to medical treatment and care, and helping deliver clean water to parts of the world that would not otherwise have access. The applications are endless and we rely on these materials. <a href="http://advances.sciencemag.org/highwire/filestream/197112/field_highwire_adjunct_files/0/1700782_SM.pdf">Data on rates and trends</a> for plastic production and waste generation are nothing short of staggering.</p>
<p>In the near-term the most effective strategy may involve <a href="https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/plasticpledge/">each one of us</a> taking stock of our plastic usage and disposal habits, compare that with our actual needs and what we could be doing differently, and adjust accordingly.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/97514/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John Meeker receives research funding from the U.S. National Institutes of Health and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. </span></em></p>Microplastics are everywhere–our water, soil, and even the air we breathe. The consequences of this exposure on human health is unknown. But studies in animals give us reason to worry.John Meeker, Professor of Environmental Health Sciences, University of MichiganLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/865952017-12-02T08:11:26Z2017-12-02T08:11:26ZFrom fireworks to iodine and IQ: the perchlorate connection<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/195249/original/file-20171117-19269-92mbul.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">"Remember, remember the fifth of November"...</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/andywilkes/2999025703/in/photolist-5z1MRH-aCbJGQ-aC93UB-8dB8Fa-9YqFGx-aC94Dp-crT21N-HiUxBN-qkHvQv-cHTykU-aCbHHQ-JLrPqN-2799SR-cQzwaj-TaGKjN-cQzx2N-cQzBDE-52buvj-crSWy7-279aAc-27dC9u-6C4Wu5-8gFFfa-527gb4-cQzy5W-52buVo-NWkXAF-sCEhSj-cM7oAG-fkazHg-4NDrL-6Wn5jE-ZiuxmN-dnyuXc-BWFuoC-7g3ExK-WyvWcL-uH6eF-cWzaBW-8vsCQR-RCpSw3-8vw2Hj-b5qeRz-D7uWAo-8RUi72-GAD3Z-8vwgeL-21eh9zY-q48Jxg-8vtyRx">Andy Wilkes/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Fireworks are a key part of a wide number of public celebrations around the world, including Australia Day (January 26), the Festival of Sant Joan in Genoa, Italy (June 24), US Independence Day (July 4), Bastille Day (July 14), National Day in Signapore (August 9), Diwali in India (October), Guy Fawkes Night in the United Kingdom (November 5) and New Year’s Eve in Jakarta, Indonesia (December 31). But while they are a visual delight, fireworks are anything but innocuous. Research has shown that they can cause <a href="https://theconversation.com/our-prettiest-pollutant-just-how-bad-are-fireworks-for-the-environment-52451">significant air pollution</a> and the residues they leave behind – including <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304389410009672">strontium, barium, cobalt and lead</a> – can be highly dangerous.</p>
<p>A less-known fact is that fireworks contain significant amounts of <a href="http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es0700698">perchlorate</a>, a chemical of particular concern because of its potential effects on foetal brain development. A <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25057878">2014 study</a> published in <em>Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism</em> examined data from more than 21,000 pregnant women in the United Kingdom and Italy. All of tested positive for perchlorate, and many also had low iodine levels. Children born to women with the highest levels of perchlorate and the lowest levels of iodine were found to be at greater risk of significant IQ loss. So what’s the connection between perchlorate, iodine and IQ?</p>
<h2>Perchlorate and thyroids</h2>
<p>The answer is that perchlorate blocks iodine uptake by the body’s thyroid glands, reducing their ability to produce sufficient levels of thyroid hormone. This hormone (and hence iodine) is needed for normal brain development. Since the 1970s most children world-wide are tested at birth to ensure they have enough thyroid hormone. If not they are given thyroid supplementation. Thyroid hormone is needed before birth as well, and it was recently demonstrated that a pregnant women’s thyroid hormone levels are vital for her <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26497402">child’s future IQ and brain structure</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/195639/original/file-20171121-6061-ngve35.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/195639/original/file-20171121-6061-ngve35.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/195639/original/file-20171121-6061-ngve35.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=629&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/195639/original/file-20171121-6061-ngve35.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=629&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/195639/original/file-20171121-6061-ngve35.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=629&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/195639/original/file-20171121-6061-ngve35.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=791&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/195639/original/file-20171121-6061-ngve35.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=791&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/195639/original/file-20171121-6061-ngve35.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=791&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Structure of the chemical compound perchlorate.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perchlorate">Wikipedia</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>As a consequence, too much perchlorate or other factors that interfere with thyroid function are bad news for pregnant women. In the United States, the Environment Protection Agency has estimated that up to 16 million people could be drinking <a href="https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-08/documents/epa815f11003.pdf">perchlorate-contaminated water</a>. Worse, because perchlorate is highly soluble in water as well as colourless, tasteless and odourless, people won’t know if their water is safe without it tested.</p>
<p>Perchlorate is thus a problem for human health because it interferes with production of thyroid hormone, something we all need. The condition of not having enough is called <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothyroidism">hypothyroidism</a>, and can cause us to become tired, depressed and overweight. So essential is thyroid hormone that some doctors have referred to it as the “fire of life”.</p>
<p>The importance of thyroid hormone for pregnant women and young children cannot be understated: The lack of either iodine or thyroid hormone during early development, especially the foetal and perinatal periods, results in lower IQ as well as an increased risk of neurodevelopmental disease such as <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autism_spectrum">autism spectrum disorder</a> (ASD) or <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adult_attention_deficit_hyperactivity_disorder">attention deficit hyperactivity disorders</a> (AD/HD). It has been estimated that neurodevelopmental disorders affect <a href="https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/ehp358/">1 in 6 American children today</a>. In the United Kingdom, it is estimated that <a href="http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/194/6/500">1 in 100 children are diagnosed with ASD</a>, while in the US the rate is approximately 1 in 68. There was an unprecedented and worrying increase in ASD incidence between 2000 and 2014, and given that human DNA has been relatively stable over that time period, genetics are unlikely to explain this increase.</p>
<h2>Endocrine-disrupting chemicals</h2>
<p>An increasing number of scientists and health professionals, including paediatricians and psychiatrists, are focusing on the multitude of chemicals to which we are exposed on a daily basis that can affect brain development. Of particular concern are chemicals that disrupt hormones – <a href="https://theconversation.com/everyday-chemicals-may-affect-brain-development-including-foetal-iq-75897">endocrine-disrupting chemicals</a> as they are called. When thinking of brain development and neurodevelopmental disorders, experts immediately think of the main hormone needed for brain development: thyroid hormone. Hence the concern over perchlorate, which is notorious for interfering with our bodies’ capacity to make this hormone.</p>
<p>Fireworks are by no means the only source of perchlorate in our environment. Because it’s highly soluble in water and stable, perchlorate can contaminate croplands and be taken up by vegetables and fruits grown there. Foods with the highest documented levels of perchlorate include melons, dairy and leafy vegetables such as spinach and lettuce. Given the vulnerability of the rapidly growing brains of babies, another particularly unfortunate source is breast milk and <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/jes200918">infant formula</a>. New-borns are particular vulnerable, not only because their brains are growing quickly, but they also absorb more food and water for their body weight. But both cows-milk and soy-based infant formulas have been found to contain significant levels of perchlorate as well. Yet soy products are not at option, as they contain yet another compound that interferes with thyroid hormone production, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genistein">genistein</a>. So, soy-fed infants and children are doubly at risk.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/195247/original/file-20171117-19256-wut8mk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/195247/original/file-20171117-19256-wut8mk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/195247/original/file-20171117-19256-wut8mk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/195247/original/file-20171117-19256-wut8mk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/195247/original/file-20171117-19256-wut8mk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/195247/original/file-20171117-19256-wut8mk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/195247/original/file-20171117-19256-wut8mk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Perchlorate has been found in infant formula.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/jar0d/5210381038/in/photolist-8WqyKQ-afSLWn-7iC395-hfoPc3-5MpAP9-74JdxA-npGxaH-8jvNSf-4Zd2xa-63ciJk-9UEsSC-8GCTVh-97EuXJ-aCJcxU-83TkS4-eAJYH4-4ofkhB-8HxQU8-fGsD6o-89XJGq-nSnTvy-q4xLNW-5N1dM3-bDrVAq-63s3Qu-L6bj8-G4idSs-gZqyzW-qQFizY-2sBXeA-hpsHQ1-o6Ufj3-nbAGzz-85fzGt-8gtHi7-PA1GN-9SxjMu-j1hPUK-p2oLsT-QPqYun-h6fFDM-njYPFp-stGeAT-oULHMR-dYibRp-bCEz7L-9Go18u-57kkRH-q772t-bRzk1R">Sander van der Wel/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In the United States, perchlorate can even be used in food packaging. Despite well-founded objections from a <a href="http://www.packaginglaw.com/news/ngos-request-hearing-fda%E2%80%99s-denial-their-perchlorate-food-additive-petition">number of NGOs</a>, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently <a href="http://www.packaginglaw.com/news/fda-removes-clearance-potassium-perchlorate-sealing-gaskets-based-abandonment">upheld their 2005 decision</a> to allow perchlorate to be used as an anti-static or sealing agent.</p>
<p>Ironically, the same administration reported that levels of perchlorate in the American diet had <a href="https://chemicalwatch.com/52040/us-fda-amount-of-perchlorate-increasing-in-food-products">increased significantly</a> since this decision was taken. Comparing results from two surveys made between 2003-2006 and 2008-2012, revealed significant increases in perchlorate content in various foods, with packaged foods such as salami showing increases of 150-fold. Certain samples of infant food also showed an increase of more than 100-fold. Overall it was estimated that the perchlorate content of the food eaten by infants and toddlers had increased by 34 and 23 % since the FDA decision.</p>
<p>In Europe, perchlorate can also be found on food, as indicated in a 2017 study, <a href="https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/5043">“Dietary exposure assessment to perchlorate in the European population”</a>. In toddlers and children – the most vulnerable populations along with pregnant and nursing women – maximum levels were ten times as high as in adults. Food is thus a significant source of perchlorate both sides of the Atlantic.</p>
<p>Finally, perchlorate is not the only chemical that affects thyroid hormone production. Others include pesticides, per-fluorinated compounds, flame retardants and plasticizers. Because multiple thyroid-hormone disrupting chemicals are found in human amniotic fluid, babies are exposed during their entire development in their mother’s womb. My team recomposed a mixture of chemicals commonly found in human amniotic fluid, including perchlorate. They were used at exactly the same concentrations in amniotic fluid as measured by epidemiological studies, and we found that the mixture affected not only thyroid hormone signalling but also <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28266608">brain development, brain gene expression, numbers of neurons in the brain and behaviour</a>.</p>
<h2>So what can be done?</h2>
<p>What can be done if governmental agencies continue to fail to regulate perchlorate and other thyroid disrupting chemicals? First, try to limit the effects of perchlorate:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>If you’re pregnant or nursing, use iodized salt. <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22335882">Studies show</a> that women increase the iodine content of their breast milk when using iodized salt.</p></li>
<li><p>Take vitamin and mineral supplements that contain 150µg iodine per tablet per day, especially if pregnant or breast feeding. This meets half of the <a href="http://www.who.int/elena/titles/guidance_summaries/iodine_pregnancy/en/">WHO recommendations for iodine intake in pregnancy</a>; the remaining half will come from a balanced diet.</p></li>
<li><p>Eat as much fresh, preferably organically grown, produce as possible. Organically grown produce will have lower pesticide levels. Certain pesticides can act as <a href="https://www.efsa.europa.eu/fr/efsajournal/pub/3293">thyroid disruptors at high levels</a>.</p></li>
<li><p>Reduced the use of packaged foods. In addition to perchlorate, packaging can contaminate food with other thyroid disruptors, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28651165">such as phthalates</a>.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>And, of course, skip the fireworks displays. They may be beautiful, but the consequences of perchlorate exposure for you and your infant’s health could be serious.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/86595/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Barbara Demeneix a reçu des financements de Europe (H2020), Agence National de la Recherche, France). Barbara Demeneix is a co-founder of Watchfrog (<a href="https://www.watchfrog.fr/">https://www.watchfrog.fr/</a>) but receives no financial compensation from this company. </span></em></p>A chemical found in products as diverse as fireworks and food packaging, perchlorate can interfere with thyroid function as well as foetal brain development.Barbara Demeneix, Professor Physiology/ Endocrinology, Muséum national d’histoire naturelle (MNHN)Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/821322017-08-21T11:00:09Z2017-08-21T11:00:09ZCan low doses of chemicals affect your health? A new report weighs the evidence<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/182486/original/file-20170817-28123-10gdonh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Assessing the data.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/closeup-view-asian-scientist-lab-coat-640126117?src=tVoRmG97ZcHifpUYWwTgIA-1-1">LightField Studios/shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Toxicology’s founding father, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paracelsus">Paracelsus</a>, is famous for proclaiming that “<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_dose_makes_the_poison">the dose makes the poison</a>.” This phrase represents a pillar of traditional toxicology: Essentially, chemicals are harmful only at high enough doses. </p>
<p>But <a href="https://academic.oup.com/edrv/article/33/3/378/2354852/Hormones-and-Endocrine-Disrupting-Chemicals-Low">increasing evidence</a> suggests that even low levels of <a href="https://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/topics/agents/endocrine/index.cfm">“endocrine disrupting chemicals”</a> can interfere with hormonal signals in the body in potentially harmful ways. </p>
<p>Standard toxicity tests don’t always detect the effects that chemicals can have at lower levels. And, even when the data do suggest such effects, scientists and policymakers may not act upon this information in a timely manner. </p>
<p>Recognizing these challenges, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) asked a committee of scientists to study the issue in detail. How can we better identify whether chemicals have effects at low doses? And how can we act on this information to protect public health? </p>
<p>After several years of work, <a href="https://www.nap.edu/catalog/24758/application-of-systematic-review-methods-in-an-overall-strategy-for-evaluating-low-dose-toxicity-from-endocrine-active-chemicals">the committee’s report</a> was released by the National Academy of Sciences in July. This landmark report provides the EPA with a strategy to identify and analyze data about low-dose health effects, as well as two case study examples. It is an evidence-based call to action, and scientists and policymakers should take notice. </p>
<h2>Case studies</h2>
<p>What exactly is a “low dose”? The committee defined this as “external or internal exposure that falls with the range estimated to occur in humans.” That covers any level of chemical exposure that we would encounter in our daily lives. </p>
<p>Adverse health effects, as defined by the committee, can include any biological change that impairs a person’s functional capacity or ability to handle stress, or makes her more susceptible to other exposures.</p>
<p>To help the EPA better identify whether chemicals can have adverse effects at low doses, the committee developed a three-part strategy. First, actively collect a wide range of data with participation from stakeholders and the public. Then, analyze and integrate the available evidence in a systematic way. Finally, act on this evidence to improve risk assessments and toxicity testing. </p>
<p>To put this strategy into practice, the committee conducted a <a href="https://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/materials/systematic_review_508.pdf">systematic review</a> of two endocrine-disrupting chemicals. This involved assessing the relevant data from human, animal and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_vitro">cell-based</a> lab studies. Each of these approaches has different strengths and weaknesses, so examining the evidence together offers insight that a single approach could not provide.</p>
<p>The first case study looked at <a href="https://toxtown.nlm.nih.gov/text_version/chemicals.php?id=24">phthalates</a>, chemicals that increase the flexibility of plastic products such as shower curtains and food wrapping. </p>
<p>The committee found that diethylhexyl phthalate and other selected phthalates are associated with changes in male reproductive and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anogenital_distance">hormonal health</a>. Overall, the data were strong enough to classify diethylhexyl phthalate as a “presumed reproductive hazard” in humans. </p>
<p>The second case study focused on <a href="https://toxtown.nlm.nih.gov/text_version/chemicals.php?id=79">polybrominated diphenyl ethers</a>, flame retardants used for over 30 years. Though they are now being phased out, these chemicals remain a concern for humans. They are still present in older products and can persist in the environment for many years.</p>
<p>Based on data showing the impact of these chemicals on learning and IQ, the panel concluded that developmental exposure is “presumed to pose a hazard to intelligence in humans.” </p>
<h2>Barriers for scientists</h2>
<p>During its review, the committee encountered a variety of barriers that could impede similar investigations into specific chemicals. </p>
<p>First, when reviewing evidence, it’s important to assess any systematic errors – also known as <a href="http://methods.cochrane.org/bias/assessing-risk-bias-included-studies#What%20is%20bias?">biases</a> – that might have lead to incorrect results. These errors can arise from study design flaws, such as failure to properly <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blinded_experiment">blind the researchers</a> during analysis. </p>
<p>Some journals have strict guidelines for reporting details related to bias, but many do not. Better adherence to <a href="https://www.nc3rs.org.uk/arrive-guidelines">reporting guidelines</a> would improve scientists’ ability to assess the quality of evidence.</p>
<p>Second, the committee noted a discrepancy between the concept of doses used in human and animal studies. This made it difficult to compare data from different sources. </p>
<p>For example, most toxicologists simply report the dose that they delivered to animals. But some of that administered dose might not actually be absorbed. The actual <a href="https://toxlearn.nlm.nih.gov/htmlversion/images/4_4_agent_chart.jpg">internal dose</a> of chemical circulating in the body and causing harm may differ from the amount that was <a href="http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095351856">administered</a>.</p>
<p>By contrast, epidemiologists usually think about dose as the level of chemical they <a href="https://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/topics/science/biomarkers/index.cfm">detect in the body</a>, but they may not know how much of the chemical an individual was actually exposed to. </p>
<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physiologically_based_pharmacokinetic_modelling">Biological modeling techniques</a> can help scientists draw the connection between administered and internal doses and more closely compare results from animal and human studies. </p>
<p>Finally, many toxicology studies focus on only a single chemical. This is a valuable way to identify how one chemical affects the body. However, given that we are all exposed to chemical mixtures, these procedures may be of limited use in the real world. </p>
<p>The committee suggested that toxicologists incorporate real-world mixtures into their studies, to provide more relevant information about the risk to human health.</p>
<h2>The bigger picture</h2>
<p>This report demonstrates the challenges facing the field of toxicology and environmental health: How well can existing and emerging laboratory techniques predict adverse outcomes in humans?</p>
<p>Traditional animal experiments usually use high doses, which don’t necessarily reflect the real world. These studies can be an important first step in identifying health hazards, but they cannot accurately predict how or at what levels the chemicals affect humans. The committee noted that more relevant doses and better modeling could help mitigate this problem. </p>
<p>Emerging <a href="https://www.epa.gov/endocrine-disruption/use-high-throughput-assays-and-computational-tools-endocrine-disruptor">high-throughput testing</a> techniques use <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_vitro">cell-based methods</a> to detect how a chemical changes specific molecular or cellular activities. These newer methods are increasingly used in toxicology testing. They have the potential to quickly identify harmful chemicals, but have yet to be fully accepted by the scientific community. </p>
<p>For these two case studies, the committee noted that high-throughput tests were not particularly helpful in drawing conclusions about health effects. Many of these studies are narrowly focused – looking at, for example, just a single signaling pathway, without indicating a chemical’s overall influence on an organism. Nevertheless, these methods could be used to prioritize chemicals for further in-depth testing, since activity in one pathway may predict a chemical’s capacity to cause harm. </p>
<p>Despite the imperfections of our testing methods, there’s already ample evidence about low-dose effects from many chemicals. The EPA should implement this new strategy to efficiently identify and act on problematic endocrine-disrupting chemicals. Only through such strong, science-based efforts can we prevent adverse effects from chemical exposures – and allow everyone to live the healthy lives that they deserve.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/82132/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Rachel Shaffer does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Evidence suggests that some chemicals can affect our bodies – even in very low doses. How can we better identify and act on these toxic materials?Rachel Shaffer, PhD Student, Environmental Toxicology, University of WashingtonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/705862016-12-20T04:14:59Z2016-12-20T04:14:59ZEndocrine disrupting chemicals – is there any larger, more neglected health problem?<p>It is a safe assumption that the large majority of people reading this article will have heard little to nothing about the problems of endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) or xenoestrogens. There are some 800 chemicals suspected as being capable of interfering with hormone receptors, synthesis, conversion or cell signalling during critical periods of cell and organ development. </p>
<p>Some of these occur naturally, but many are synthetic and used in agriculture (growth promoters, pesticides and wetting agents), plasticizers, as flame-retardants in textiles, clothing and furnishings, non-stick coatings, food additives, electronics and cosmetics, personal care products and perfumes. The <a href="http://www.who.int/ceh/risks/cehemerging2/en/">World Health Organisation</a> states that EDCs:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>have been suspected to be associated with altered reproductive function in males and females; increased incidence of breast cancer, abnormal growth patterns and neurodevelopmental delays in children, as well as changes in immune function.</p>
<p>Human exposure to EDCs occurs via ingestion of food, dust and water, via inhalation of gases and particles in the air, and through the skin. EDCs can also be transferred from the pregnant woman to the developing foetus or child through the placenta and breast milk. Pregnant mothers and children are the most vulnerable populations to be affected by developmental exposures, and the effect of exposures to EDCs may not become evident until later in life. Research also shows that it may increase the susceptibility to non-communicable diseases.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>EDCs have been high on the radar of <a href="http://www.ecotox.org.au/aje/archives/vol16p89.pdf">marine and water biologists</a> and ecologists for many years, with a large research literature published on diverse phenomena like thyroid problems in <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0166445X89900088">seals</a> and the development of shrinking penis sizes in <a href="http://www.livingalongsidewildlife.com/2013/05/shrinking-alligator-penises-using.html">alligators</a>. Human research includes a report of the high incidence of micropenis in newborns in a <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22372605">high pesticide use</a> area of Brazil.</p>
<p>In 2007, 28 Australian scientists signed a statement named the <a href="http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/103522/20091110-1348/lwa.gov.au/news/2008/feb/13/black-mountain-declaration.html">Black Mountain Declaration</a> noting:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>There is widespread compelling evidence that a range of natural and synthetic chemicals, which are present in the global environment, are continuing to impact wildlife by a variety of mechanisms that directly or indirectly disrupt the endocrine systems of some species including birds, fish, mammals, reptiles and molluscs.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>They noted:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Despite the valid reasons for concern, evidence of impacts to humans from environmental exposure to EDCs is yet to be established. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>But they called for a research agenda that included</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Minimising unnecessary exposure of EDCs to humans via food, water and air.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>By 2012, the WHO and the UN Environment Programme had released a major report <a href="http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/78102/1/WHO_HSE_PHE_IHE_2013.1_eng.pdf?ua=1">State of the Science of Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals</a>. A <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23472906">Lancet</a> editorial agreed many endocrine-related disorders were on the rise and disease risk due to EDCs might be underestimated because of the complexity of multiple exposures and the under-developed state of research into this. </p>
<p>They agreed with the UN report that there was no widely agreed system for assessing exposures and adverse health outcomes. Newer data strongly suggest the adverse effects of some EDCs exposures can affect future, as yet unborn generations (trans-generational effects).</p>
<p>The US Endocrine Society’s 2015 <a href="https://www.endocrine.org/%7E/media/endosociety/files/publications/scientific-statements/edc-2-scientific-statement.pdf?la=en">report</a> is the most recent and most authoritative document currently available reviewing the risks.</p>
<p>In October this year, a study in the <a href="http://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/landia/PIIS2213-8587(16)30275-3.pdf">Lancet</a> assessed the costs of EDCs to the US economy at $US340 billion or 2.33% of GDP, higher than <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25742516">in Europe</a> ($US217 billion or 1.28% of GDP). An article in <a href="http://www.nature.com/nrendo/journal/v13/n1/full/nrendo.2016.198.html">Nature Reviews</a> commenting on the Lancet study noted EDCs irreversibly interfere with the programming role of hormones during key phases of development. These include sexual differentiation in foetal life, thyroid hormone insufficiency (sufficient levels of thyroid hormone are crucial for brain development) and some hormone-related cancers, such as breast cancer.</p>
<p>Last week, there were news reports of a study published by scientists at the Queensland Brain Institute which found pregnant women with low vitamin D were more likely to have children with autistic traits by the age of six. The lead scientist on the study <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-14/autism-linked-to-lacked-of-vitamin-d-during-pregnancy-study/8115118?WT.mc_id=newsmail&WT.tsrc=Newsmail">suggested</a> vitamin D supplementation in pregnancy might be a simple remedy to the problem. Perhaps.</p>
<p>But how might low vitamin D levels be explained?</p>
<p>One factor is suggested in a <a href="http://press.endocrine.org/doi/10.1210/jc.2016-2134">recent national study</a> of US adults which reported markers of phthalate (DEHP) being consistently inversely associated with vitamin D levels. Phthalates are a group of chemicals commonly used to make plastics more flexible and harder to break.</p>
<p>With bisphenol, a statistically significant inverse relationship with vitamin D was found in women, but not in men. Bisphenols are used to make plastics commonly used in products like water bottles, the lining of tin cans and “squeezy” baby food packaging, sports equipment, CDs, and DVDs.</p>
<p>Exposure to these chemicals is now almost universal. Data from <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27788374">French pregnant women</a> show that bisphenol A (BPA), and some metabolites of phthalates, pesticides (mainly pyrethroids), dioxins, furans, polychlorobiphenyls (PCBs), brominated flame retardants (BFRs), perfluorinated compounds (PFCs) and metals were quantified in almost 100% of the pregnant women.</p>
<h2>Situation in Australia</h2>
<p>In 2013, the Coalition government repealed Labor’s changes to the APVMA - Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (the Commonwealth agricultural veterinary chemical regulator), which would have required chemicals to be re-registered every 15 years. In many cases, this would have required reassessment of existing chemicals using contemporary testing methodologies. </p>
<p>Under intense lobbying from chemical companies and big agricultural interests, Labor back-flipped and supported the Liberal changes to their own reforms. So some of the organophosphates pesticides registered in the 1960s and 1970s have never been reassessed to see if, given advances in knowledge, they are still safe. Evidence from studies <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3002199/">like this one</a> of the lower mental development of two year old children of Mexican born farmworkers in the USA suggests they are not.</p>
<p>Australian regulators have largely managed to avoid calling endocrine disruption a toxicological endpoint requiring assessment. So the vast majority of agricultural and veterinary chemicals used today on food in Australia are unassessed for specific EDC activity. The chemicals which migrate from packaging materials used on food, into food also lack this rigorous assessment.</p>
<p>Australia continues to sanction the use of recognised highly hazardous pesticides (HHP), banned in many nations of the world on food crops and in locations where human exposures are unavoidable. The regulators’ claim is that agriculture cannot do without them and the reduced crop yields would be economically catastrophic. For example, the cost of eliminating such pesticides in the UK alone has been <a href="http://randd.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=11346_PS2818finalreportfull.pdf">estimated</a> at between £160-440 million.</p>
<p>They imply the overall benefit to society of using these pesticides exceeds the risks, implying nations like France, Netherlands and Mozambique which have banned various HHPs from use, were too conservative in their assessments. To truly undertake such an assessment, one would need to assess all the impacts including contributions to endocrine disruption driven disease states. No such assessment is being done in Australia.</p>
<p>The denial of harm and lack of adequate assessment continues in the industrial chemical arena, where assessment is even less rigorous. One topical example is the flame retardants PFOS/PFOA which have been used in <a href="https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/health/2016/08/27/exclusive-toxic-chemical-conflict-defence-sites/14722200003667">military and other airports</a>. </p>
<p>The Australian government relied upon outdated ESFA 2008 data, rather than contemporary USA assessment data to set a tolerable daily intake <a href="http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/content/A12B57E41EC9F326CA257BF0001F9E7D/%24File/PFAS-interim-health-reference-values-june2016.pdf">75 times higher</a> than the <a href="https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-06/documents/drinkingwaterhealthadvisories_pfoa_pfos_updated_5.31.16.pdf">USA</a>. </p>
<p>PFOA/PFOS virtually never breakdown, and accumulate in tissues, and are endocrine disruptors linked to cancer, liver and thyroid disease, immune suppression and decreased fertility.</p>
<p>Within human pharmacy, many chemicals that have endocrine actions lie outside the Department of Health’s Therapeutic Goods Authority’s remit, but are part and parcel of delivery mechanisms or packaging of the medicines, (such as preservatives in creams (parabens) and perfumes/plasticisers (phthalates), even blood collection bags <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259556794_DEHP_plasticizer_and_blood_bags_challenges_ahead">leach phthalates into the blood</a>.</p>
<p>Europe is taking a <a href="http://ec.europa.eu/smart-regulation/roadmaps/docs/2017_env_005_reach_refit_en.pdf">far more rigorous approach</a> to EDC’s recognising the financial benefits of preventing disease through reducing exposures to these chemicals. They have done a lot of the heavy lifting - Australia could start the process with some cut and paste to catch up.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/70586/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<h4 class="border">Disclosure</h4><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Matthew Landos has received funding from Fisheries Research and Development Corporation. He is Director or Future Fisheries Veterinary Service Pty Ltd. </span></em></p>a large majority of people reading this article will have heard little to nothing about the problems of endocrine disrupting chemicalsSimon Chapman, Emeritus Professor in Public Health, University of SydneyMatthew Landos, Lecturer Veterinary Aquatic Animal Health, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/437512015-06-25T12:11:26Z2015-06-25T12:11:26ZAre plastics making men infertile?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/86368/original/image-20150625-12990-1pwdna7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Gird your loins</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p><a href="http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/health/news/article4473064.ece">Recent research</a> has reignited concerns that exposure to chemicals from plastics might be to blame for low sperm counts in young men. I share the concerns about the high prevalence of low sperm counts <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2605.2005.00635.x/abstract">(one in six young men)</a> – and <a href="http://embor.embopress.org/content/13/5/398.long">my research</a> is directed at trying to identify what causes it. But whether plastics are to blame isn’t a simple matter.</p>
<p>Plastics are part of the fabric of our everyday lives and perform many essential functions. Without their thousands of uses, many of which are not obvious to us, our modern world could not function as it is. Plastics bring everyday benefits whether through children’s toys, the insulation around electrical wiring, their utility in food containers/wraps or their widespread use in medical products from blood bags, gloves and syringes, to the coating of some tablets and capsules. </p>
<p>But are there hidden dangers of plastics to human health, especially to male fertility? This is a surprisingly difficult question to answer, not least because everyone is exposed to chemicals that derive from plastics. This means we don’t really have an unexposed group (“control”) against which to compare. </p>
<p>Most people probably don’t understand how we are exposed to chemicals from plastics. After all, we don’t eat the plastic wraps around food or chew electric wiring. Plasticisers are chemicals used to make plastic (which is naturally hard and brittle) bendy and resistant to breaking, so prolonging its useful life. As a guide, the more flexible the plastic, the more plasticiser it will contain. The most widely used plasticisers are called <a href="http://toxtown.nlm.nih.gov/text_version/chemicals.php?id=24">phthalates</a>, which come in different forms with different uses.</p>
<p>Plasticisers leach out of the plastic over time and will contaminate any food, drink or other material with which they have contact. This was the primary reason why phthalate plasticisers were removed from use in water bottles many years ago and replaced by polyethylene terephthalate, which has different properties. Nevertheless our main route of exposure to the most commonly used phthalate <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23333758">is still via</a> our food/diets, even if we do not fully understand how this contamination occurs.</p>
<p>What ignited concerns about phthalate effects on fertility were <a href="http://humrep.oxfordjournals.org/content/18/7/1383.long">studies in laboratory rats</a>. These showed that exposure in pregnancy to certain phthalates caused reproductive disorders in the male offspring, including reduced sperm counts and fertility. As pregnant women (and thus the male fetuses in their wombs) are exposed to the same phthalates, could this be the cause of reproductive disorders in men?</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/86379/original/image-20150625-13016-1u6t4cw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/86379/original/image-20150625-13016-1u6t4cw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=375&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/86379/original/image-20150625-13016-1u6t4cw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=375&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/86379/original/image-20150625-13016-1u6t4cw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=375&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/86379/original/image-20150625-13016-1u6t4cw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/86379/original/image-20150625-13016-1u6t4cw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/86379/original/image-20150625-13016-1u6t4cw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">One is all you need.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Conflicting evidence</h2>
<p>The seemingly direct way to answer this question is to measure phthalate exposure of pregnant women and see if high exposure is associated with reproductive disorders in their sons. Some, but not all, <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1280349/">such studies</a> have shown an association between male reproductive disorders and phthalate exposure of the mother. The problem is that this approach can never prove that the exposure caused the disorder. More importantly, <a href="http://press.endocrine.org/doi/10.1210/jc.2011-2411?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori:rid:crossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub%3dpubmed">other evidence</a> points in the completely <a href="http://www.greenbiz.com/news/2010/05/24/science-behind-phthalates-ban">opposite direction</a>.</p>
<p>Phthalates cause male reproductive disorders in rats by reducing production of the male sex hormone – testosterone – by the testes of the male fetus. To induce this effect, pregnant rats have to be exposed to phthalate levels 50,000 times higher than pregnant women are exposed to. Exposure of human fetal testes (obtained with ethical permission from legal pregnancy terminations) to the same high phthalate levels as in rats has no effect on their testosterone production. Nor do reproductive disorders occur in male monkeys after their mothers are exposed to equally high phthalate levels during pregnancy. </p>
<p>In research it is common to be faced with problems such as this, where different types of data simply do not agree. But what should we do in the face of this uncertainty? One reaction is to assume the worst, accept the association studies and ignore the studies that don’t agree with them. In which case, the next step would be to ban or restrict phthalate use, resulting in numerous changes to our modern society that will affect everyone. Some argue that this is the <a href="https://chemicalwatch.com/20622/us-panel-wants-five-phthalates-banned-in-childrens-products">safest route</a> to take.</p>
<p>While I am 100% in favour of safety, I know that in science one cannot simply choose to ignore evidence that does not fit a particular point of view, at least not when that evidence is known to be robust. It is not an evidence-led approach and is, by any standards, nonsensical.</p>
<p>This does not mean that I am fully convinced that plastics are 100% safe, but neither does the available evidence convince me that they are a major factor in male reproductive disorders. I am convinced that something in our environment or lifestyles is causing low sperm counts. I just wish I knew what.</p>
<p><em>Note: this piece was changed on August 6 2015 to be clear that there is no suggestion plastic drinking bottles still contain phthalate plasticisers.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/43751/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Richard Sharpe receives funding from the UK Medical research Council.</span></em></p>Recent research into the health effects of the plastic-making chemicals phthalates has reignited concerns about low sperm counts. But the evidence is far from conclusive.Richard Sharpe, Group leader, male reproductive health, The University of EdinburghLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/418762015-06-02T10:12:05Z2015-06-02T10:12:05ZWhat does exposure to environmental chemicals mean for our health?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/83585/original/image-20150601-6967-1ywo4zf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Environmental chemicals are found in a range of common household products. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-85926235/stock-photo-image-of-many-plastic-bottles-with-water-in-a-shop.html?src=VohMyolLWzvRSkwCCzAqNg-1-3">Water bottles via www.shutterstock.com.</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>It is not possible to live in a <a href="https://theconversation.com/five-myths-about-the-chemicals-you-breathe-eat-and-drink-26849">chemical-free world</a> on Earth. Chemicals are all around us, and some, <a href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/06/140605140007.htm">like oxygen and hydrogen</a>, are essential components for <a href="http://ec.europa.eu/environment/chemicals/index_en.htm">living creatures</a> including us humans. However, some other chemicals may be harmful to our health. </p>
<p>Some environmental chemicals (which are often, but not always, human-made) have been linked to physical and cognitive health conditions and even <a href="http://www.clinicalepigeneticsjournal.com/content/7/1/55">DNA change</a>. Many of these chemicals, such as arsenic, phthalates, polyfluoroalkyl and volatile organic compounds, to name a few, are found in a range of common household or industry products that we use or are exposed to on a regular basis, including cleaning supplies, car exhaust and certain kinds of cosmetics.</p>
<h2>How do we study exposure to environmental chemicals and health?</h2>
<p>One of the prime sources for data on exposure to environmental chemicals and human health comes from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (<a href="http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/about_nhanes.htm">NHANES</a>). </p>
<p>This is a program of epidemiological studies run by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. NHANES monitors the health status of adults and children in the US with a representative sample and uses both interviews and physical examinations. </p>
<p>Some of the information collected includes urine and blood samples, which we can use to track exposure to environmental chemicals. This gives us a picture of the emerging risk hazards from chemicals – we can test the volume of a given chemical in urine or blood and see what the associations are with a range of health conditions. Researchers have been doing this since the 1980s, and scores of studies have been released detailing the associations between concentrations of environmental chemicals in the body and different health outcomes.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/81767/original/image-20150514-28638-r5gomg.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/81767/original/image-20150514-28638-r5gomg.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=426&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/81767/original/image-20150514-28638-r5gomg.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=426&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/81767/original/image-20150514-28638-r5gomg.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=426&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/81767/original/image-20150514-28638-r5gomg.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=536&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/81767/original/image-20150514-28638-r5gomg.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=536&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/81767/original/image-20150514-28638-r5gomg.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=536&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Overview of main health effects on humans from some common types of pollution.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Health_effects_of_pollution.png">Medical gallery of Mikael Häggström 2014</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Effects on physical health</h2>
<p>The association between exposure to these kinds of chemicals and human health has been well documented in research using data from NHANES. While many environmental chemicals have been studied, I’ll focus on a few chemicals that are fairly well-known.</p>
<p>Looking at NHANES data from 2009-2010, I found an association between <a href="http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/08037051.2014.925228">high blood pressure</a> in adults and higher concentrations of heavy metals, arsenic and phthalates in urine. Other research has also associated higher urinary arsenic concentrations that could be found in contaminated groundwater or in foods (eg, grains) with impaired <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935115001085">kidney function</a> and <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016041201400350X">gout disease</a>.</p>
<p>Bisphenol-A and triclosan, used in consumer products including soaps, detergents, toys and surgical cleaning treatments, among other things, have been found to affect <a href="http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/1002883/">immune function</a> and the <a href="http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/1104748/">age at which menstruation starts</a>.</p>
<p>Phthalates, a chemical that makes plastic and vinyl more flexible, are found in plastic bottles and in pharmaceutical pills and cosmetics. They have been found to play a role in <a href="http://www.ehjournal.net/content/7/1/27">increased body mass index</a>, <a href="http://www.ehjournal.net/content/13/1/6">diabetes</a>, <a href="http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2013/08/13/peds.2012-4022">worse insulin resistance</a>, higher <a href="http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/1206211/">allergy</a> rates and <a href="http://press.endocrine.org/doi/abs/10.1210/jc.2014-2555?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori:rid:crossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub%3dpubmed">decreased testosterone</a> in both adults and children. </p>
<p>Environmental chemicals may be associated with oral health problems as well.
In a recent study, I found that people with <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11356-015-4749-3">gum disease, bone loss around the mouth, and teeth loose not due to injury</a> were found to have higher levels of heavy metals, phthalates, phenols, parabens and pesticides (among other chemicals) in their urine. Such harmful exposure could cause defects in the development of <a href="https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/pjab/85/10/85_10_500/_article">tooth enamel</a>.</p>
<h2>Environmental chemicals in the brain</h2>
<p>Environmental chemicals could also influence brain development, particularly in children and older adults. </p>
<p>For example, frequent use of household products with higher levels of pyrethroid insecticides and polyfluoroalkyl chemicals are linked to <a href="http://www.karger.com/?DOI=000342310">learning problems</a> and <a href="http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/1001898/">impaired attention</a> in children. </p>
<p>In the elderly, <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016041201200253X">vision, hearing and balance</a> might be altered through chronic exposure to a range of chemicals including heavy metals, phthalates, arsenic, pesticides, phenols, hydrocarbons and polyfluorinated compounds. And it has been further observed that these chemicals might lead to <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11356-015-4261-9">difficulties in thinking or remembering</a> as well. It is thought that these chemicals may <a href="http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.1081/DCT-200039780%20">disrupt nerve regulation</a> in the brain.</p>
<h2>Effects on emotions</h2>
<p>If environmental chemicals could impair our organs and change our <a href="http://www.jimmunol.org/content/135/2/820.long">nervous system</a>, then they might have effects on our emotional health as well. </p>
<p>In recent research, I found that higher levels of parabens and polyaromatic hydrocarbons in urine might suggest that some people need more <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11356-015-4561-0">emotional support</a>, such as talking over problems or help making difficult decisions, than others with lower concentrations do. Such relationship exists whether or not people might have other health conditions. </p>
<p>These chemicals are both quite common. Parabens are often used as preservatives in cosmetic and pharmaceutical products, and polyaromatic hydrocarbons are found in exhaust, asphalt, coal tar, smoke, soil and charbroiled foods. </p>
<p>These chemicals may trigger a physical reaction that ultimately leads to the disruption of emotions. Daily exposure to these chemicals could lead to a person developing a dependency on them. This can induce inflammation or immune function to alert cell injury or damage. And that could, in turn, chronically disturb neuron functioning, leading to the <a href="http://www.jimmunol.org/content/135/2/820.long">disruption of emotions</a>, and hence a need for more emotional support. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/82292/original/image-20150519-30528-3j2xkb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/82292/original/image-20150519-30528-3j2xkb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=387&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82292/original/image-20150519-30528-3j2xkb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=387&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82292/original/image-20150519-30528-3j2xkb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=387&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82292/original/image-20150519-30528-3j2xkb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=486&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82292/original/image-20150519-30528-3j2xkb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=486&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82292/original/image-20150519-30528-3j2xkb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=486&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">We can’t live in a chemical-free world.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-150303686/stock-photo-row-of-modern-townhouses-in-vancouver-canada.html?src=b0MSJm-Iz_MyRdqxtf0yrQ-1-23">Homes via www.shutterstock.com.</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>How do we know when we are exposed to unnecessary environmental chemicals?</h2>
<p>Once we know the relationships of harmful chemicals and health, we can start to figure out how to lessen or prevent exposure to these chemicals. This could mean reducing our use of the consumer products that contain these substances.</p>
<p>Buildings <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11356-014-3468-5">built more than 30 years ago</a> could be another source of exposure and therefore need our attention to renovate. They could emit chemicals that harm our health because they have building materials that may contain these harmful chemicals or have other pollutants like <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935115000304">mold</a>.</p>
<p>A <a href="http://omicsgroup.org/journals/building-engineering-epidemiology-northern-ireland-house-condition-survey-2168-9717.1000112.php?aid=21453">screening program</a> is one of the ways to identify housing and chemical issues at an early stage. </p>
<p>Another way is through an <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11356-015-4671-8">unpleasant smell</a> which is exactly what it sounds like. The presence of unpleasant odors might direct us to where the excess chemicals around us are. These issues could also be detected by reviewing <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11356-015-4604-6">self-rated health</a>. This is an indicator of physical and mental health issues, created by asking people questions about their health. </p>
<p>And based on new research about environmental chemicals and oral health, one could also <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11356-015-4749-3">look at teeth</a> from time to time. </p>
<p>These types of preventative measures could be carried out on a regular basis for individuals and each household to suggest when to examine and remove the unnecessary environmental chemicals in order to improve and sustain our health, well-being and quality of life.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/41876/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ivy Shiue (Scthiue) does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Chemicals in a wide array of consumer products have been linked to conditions affecting physical, cognitive and emotional health.Ivy Shiue (Scthiue), Senior research associate, Northumbria University, NewcastleLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/416602015-05-19T14:52:30Z2015-05-19T14:52:30ZHealth risks beneath the painted beauty in America’s nail salons<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/82132/original/image-20150519-25432-1arwbxg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Perfect nails, at what cost?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Nick Lehr</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The desire for beautiful nails has fueled an entire <a href="http://thedataweb.rm.census.gov/TheDataWeb_HotReport2/econsnapshot/2012/snapshot.hrml?NAICS=812113">nail salon industry</a> that’s growing rapidly, with storefronts cropping up on every major street across the nation. Yet, the recent articles from the New York Times exposed an industry that’s left workers struggling both with <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/10/nyregion/at-nail-salons-in-nyc-manicurists-are-underpaid-and-unprotected.html?emc=eta1&_r=0">unlivable wages</a> and with <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/11/nyregion/nail-salon-workers-in-nyc-face-hazardous-chemicals.html?emc=eta1">damaged health</a>. Everyone who enters a nail salon can be affected, yet the workers are the ones left entirely unprotected.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/82074/original/image-20150518-25403-1akohbz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/82074/original/image-20150518-25403-1akohbz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/82074/original/image-20150518-25403-1akohbz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82074/original/image-20150518-25403-1akohbz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82074/original/image-20150518-25403-1akohbz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82074/original/image-20150518-25403-1akohbz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82074/original/image-20150518-25403-1akohbz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82074/original/image-20150518-25403-1akohbz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">So colorful, so toxic?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/cashonco/8883808634">Kellie CA</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>A chemical by any other name</h2>
<p>Nail care products contain, in varying amounts, many toxic and potentially hazardous ingredients. </p>
<p>Chemical ingredients in nail care products range from cancer-causing compounds such as <a href="http://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/substances/formaldehyde/formaldehyde-fact-sheet">formaldehyde</a> to others that <a href="http://web.colby.edu/cleanmakeup/meet-the-ingredients/endocrine-disruptors/">disrupt the endocrine system</a>. Researchers have identified toluene, formaldehyde and dibutyl phthalate – nicknamed the “toxic trio” because of their serious health impacts – as three chemicals of high concern for salon workers.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.epa.gov/ttnatw01/hlthef/toluene.html">Toluene</a> is a commonly used solvent that creates a smooth finish across the nail and keeps the pigment from separating in the bottle, but can affect the central nervous system and cause reproductive harm. Its major use is as an additive in gasoline.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/phs/phs.asp?id=218&tid=39">Formaldehyde</a>, a known carcinogen, is used as a nail-hardening agent and disinfectant for nail care tools.</p>
<p>Exposure to <a href="http://www.epa.gov/ttnatw01/hlthef/di-n-but.html">dibutyl phthalate</a>, added to polishes to provide flexibility, has been linked to reproductive problems. In addition to this trio, there are many other harmful chemicals used in nail care products.</p>
<p>Many nail salons <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10900-008-9107-7">lack adequate exhaust ventilation</a> or multiple pathways – such as open windows and doors – to increase indoor-outdoor air exchange. Evaporated chemicals from nail products are often trapped inside salons, meaning workers are continuously exposed. So workers’ exposure is amplified: first they experience direct contact with the chemicals in the products, then they continuously breathe in these chemicals within small, poorly ventilated salons.</p>
<h2>Lack of regulatory oversight</h2>
<p>Despite nail care products’ heavy use, industrial chemicals in cosmetics are largely unregulated in the US. </p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/82083/original/image-20150518-25437-196u9ao.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/82083/original/image-20150518-25437-196u9ao.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/82083/original/image-20150518-25437-196u9ao.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82083/original/image-20150518-25437-196u9ao.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82083/original/image-20150518-25437-196u9ao.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82083/original/image-20150518-25437-196u9ao.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82083/original/image-20150518-25437-196u9ao.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82083/original/image-20150518-25437-196u9ao.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Is what’s in there what they say is in there?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/kaifr/17148576091">Kai Friis</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In fact, of the <a href="http://www.ewg.org/skindeep/2011/04/12/why-this-matters/">10,000 chemicals</a> used in personal care products, only <a href="http://www.ewg.org/news/testimony-official-correspondence/fda-warns-cosmetics-industry-follow-law-untested-ingredients">about 10%</a> have been <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/14/sunday-review/think-those-chemicals-have-been-tested.html?_r=0">assessed for safety</a>. While the US Food and Drug Administration is responsible for the <a href="http://www.fda.gov/Cosmetics/ScienceResearch/ProductTesting/default.htm">regulation of cosmetics</a>, it lacks the legal authority to require manufacturers to conduct product pre-market testing to ensure consumer safety or to require listing of ingredients in products sold for professional use.</p>
<p>What does that mean for the average consumer? Bottom line, that bottle of nail polish you apply to your nails or the nails of your five-year-old little girl was put on the market without ever having been tested for safety.</p>
<p>For workers using nail care products daily, there is no requirement for product manufacturers to disclose ingredients on their labels. And even if they do, no one is really checking to ensure that these are accurate listings. A <a href="https://www.dtsc.ca.gov/PollutionPrevention/SaferNailProducts.cfm">report</a> by the <a href="https://www.dtsc.ca.gov/index.cfm">California Department of Toxic Substances Control</a> on product testing of various nail polish brands in the San Francisco Bay Area found that some contained harmful chemicals despite misleading labels that claimed they were free of such compounds.</p>
<p>The rising awareness of the health hazards posed by the chemical ingredients in nail care products has pressured manufacturers to create safer alternatives in the form of nail polishes free of the toxic trio. But many products still contain them and there is no regulatory oversight.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/82076/original/image-20150518-25432-1fox0yj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/82076/original/image-20150518-25432-1fox0yj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/82076/original/image-20150518-25432-1fox0yj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=155&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82076/original/image-20150518-25432-1fox0yj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=155&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82076/original/image-20150518-25432-1fox0yj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=155&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82076/original/image-20150518-25432-1fox0yj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=195&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82076/original/image-20150518-25432-1fox0yj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=195&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82076/original/image-20150518-25432-1fox0yj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=195&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A moment of luxury for a patron translates to occupational health hazards for the workers.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/janet/8075357584">janet lackey</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Health effects aren’t hypothetical</h2>
<p>Nail salon workers pay a huge price in the form of their health. Exposure to nail care products with harmful chemicals can result in a number of <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2010.300099">health effects</a>, ranging from skin irritations, eye injuries, allergic reactions, <a href="http://journals.lww.com/cogbehavneurol/Abstract/2001/07000/Neuropsychological_Symptoms_Associated_With.7.aspx">cognitive and neurological symptoms</a>, nausea, respiratory problems, cancer and uncontrollable muscle contractions to impaired <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00420-014-1011-0">reproductive</a> and <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0029-1220787">development</a> processes. </p>
<p><a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10900-008-9107-7">Research studies</a>, including my research at the <a href="http://www.cpic.org/our-research/our-scientists/thu-quach.aspx">Cancer Prevention Institute of California</a>, have documented <a href="http://infohouse.p2ric.org/ref/19/18303.pdf">acute health effects</a> in these workers, such as headaches, breathing problems and skin irritations, commonly associated with overexposure to solvents used in these products. Studies have also shown that working in salons is linked to reproductive health problems, including <a href="http://journals.lww.com/epidem/Abstract/1994/03000/Spontaneous_Abortions_among_Cosmetologists.4.aspx">spontaneous birth</a>, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/occmed/kqp017">preterm delivery</a> and <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10995-008-0324-6">undersized babies</a> as well as pregnancy complications. The exposures and health effects are enough to lead some governmental agencies, including the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), to invest in <a href="http://www2.epa.gov/sciencematters/epa-science-matters-newsletter-healthier-nail-salons">research and outreach</a> to the salons. </p>
<p>As an epidemiologist, I have conducted multiple research studies to examine workplace exposures and health effects for nail salon workers. In my talks with hundreds of salon workers and owners, many have shared their personal stories of health problems, ranging from chronic headaches to tragic cases of cancer and pregnancy complications. While research doesn’t always provide definitive answers on the links between their workplace exposures and health problems, it’s hard to ignore the patterns in these stories.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/82079/original/image-20150518-25403-1t456k0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/82079/original/image-20150518-25403-1t456k0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/82079/original/image-20150518-25403-1t456k0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82079/original/image-20150518-25403-1t456k0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82079/original/image-20150518-25403-1t456k0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82079/original/image-20150518-25403-1t456k0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82079/original/image-20150518-25403-1t456k0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82079/original/image-20150518-25403-1t456k0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Is it a tradeoff between your toes and her health?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/52985700@N08/5732433853">Nubby Tongue</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What can be done?</h2>
<p>California has been leading the charge to create healthier environments for both workers and owners. The <a href="http://www.cahealthynailsalons.org/">California Healthy Nail Salon Collaborative</a> has worked with multiple counties to establish the Healthy Nail Salon Program. These counties provide training and formal recognition for salons that participate in the program, which means they use safer alternative nail care products that do not contain the toxic trio. Our research in partnership with the US EPA has shown that <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ajim.22379">these programs can be effective</a> in improving worker safer practices and the salon environment. Their workers wear gloves to minimize direct contact with the chemicals, and the salons have ventilation methods to improve air quality. Other local and state agencies should follow suit to encourage healthy salons for workers and customers. This program would provide healthy choices for consumers who like to frequent salons.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/zUps3BTv1Lo?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Portrait of California nail salon workers and health effects in their own words, made by social justice advocacy group Brave New Foundation.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Consumers who regularly <a href="http://www.goodhousekeeping.com/beauty/nails/tips/g9/natural-nail-polishes/?slide=1">buy nail care products</a> should look for nail polishes without the toxic trio – formaldehyde, toluene and phthalates. These purchasing choices will put the pressure on manufacturers to create safer alternative products.</p>
<p>Ultimately, the first line of defense for the workers and customers is to ensure that the chemicals never enter the salons in the first place. Customers can leverage their buying power toward this end.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/41660/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Thu Quach the Cancer Prevention Institute of California and Asian Health Services. As a research scientist, she receives governmental funding for research on the topic of nail salon health and safety. She does not receive any funding from for-profit organizations or any additional external funding outside of her current employment at the two organizations listed above.</span></em></p>The nail salon industry is booming. But along with polished nails come toxic health effects for the workers, due to the chemical compounds in nail care products.Thu Quach, Research Scientist, Cancer Prevention Institute of California and Director of Community Health and Research, Asian Health Services and Consulting Assistant Professor of Epidemiology, Stanford UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/166452013-08-02T13:32:04Z2013-08-02T13:32:04ZChemicals in the body show whether you’re rich or poor<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/28509/original/nkdswqsj-1375377466.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C2931%2C2136&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Spending more money just means another set of chemicals.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">PA/Dominic Lipinski</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Many people buy high-end, free-range and organic products in a bid to cut down on the amount of chemicals in their bodies. But chemicals can accumulate from a range of sources, and new research suggests that people from poorer backgrounds may not be the only ones suffering harmful effects.</p>
<p>Findings <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412013001359">from a study</a> we carried out at the University of Exeter, show that the accumulation of potentially harmful chemicals in the body affects people of all social standings - and that the type of toxicant can change according to economic status.</p>
<p>Using ten years of data from the <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes.htm">US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey</a>, we analysed possible links between a person’s socioeconomic status and the prevalence of chemicals in their body. We found a range of different chemicals and a pattern across different economic groups.</p>
<p>We weren’t expecting our findings to contradict the standard environmental justice hypothesis - the belief that poor and minority communities suffer greater exposure to environmental pollution and a disproportionate share of the burden. </p>
<p>Instead, as people become better off, changes in their lifestyle alter the types of chemicals in their bodies, rather than reducing the overall amount. This has a profound impact on the way we treat chemical build-ups. At present the major focus is on reducing exposures <a href="http://deohs.washington.edu/business-labor-resources/topics-z/environmental-justice">in individuals from poorer backgrounds</a>. </p>
<p>While the environmental justice hypothesis rings true in many areas, our research suggests that individuals of all social standings are at risk of high levels of specific types of chemicals and that we need to look at lifestyles to reduce exposure rather than focusing solely on those at the bottom of the poverty scale.</p>
<h2>Not the usual suspects</h2>
<p>The team initially considered the potential associations between <a href="https://workfamily.sas.upenn.edu/glossary/i/income-poverty-ratios-definitions">poverty income ratio</a>, a calculation used to measure wealth and standard of living, and 179 chemicals. We then narrowed our focus to 18 chemicals that showed strong links with income over several sets of the survey data.</p>
<p>The results of the analysis came as a surprise. Although around half of the 18 chemicals linked to income were associated with lower socio-economic status (as anticipated), the other half were more prevalent in wealthier individuals.</p>
<p>People with higher socioeconomic status had higher levels of serum and urinary mercury, arsenic, caesium, thallium, perfluorooctanoic acid, perfluorononanoic acid, mono(carboxyoctyl) phthalate and benzophenone-3.</p>
<p>Our research suggested that eating more fish and shellfish contributed to an increase in mercury, arsenic, thallium and perfluorononanoic acid. We also demonstrated that the use of sunscreen is an important factor in the accumulation of benzophenone-3, with people from higher socioeconomic groups more likely to use products containing the chemical.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/28568/original/zd23d342-1375437296.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/28568/original/zd23d342-1375437296.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=353&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/28568/original/zd23d342-1375437296.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=353&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/28568/original/zd23d342-1375437296.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=353&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/28568/original/zd23d342-1375437296.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=443&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/28568/original/zd23d342-1375437296.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=443&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/28568/original/zd23d342-1375437296.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=443&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Looks fishy to me.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">PA/Andy Butterton</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Lower socioeconomic status was associated with higher levels of serum and urinary lead and cadmium, antimony, bisphenol A and three phthalates (substances mainly used in plastics to increase flexibility and transparency): mono-benzyl, mono-isobutyl, mono-n-butyl.</p>
<p>We demonstrated that <a href="http://www.tobaccofreekids.org/research/factsheets/pdf/0260.pdf">cigarette smoking</a>, poor diet and occupation were among the factors likely to contribute to the build-up of cadmium and lead in those from groups with lower earnings.</p>
<p>Exposures to environmental pollutants have been associated with a wide range of diseases. For example increased levels of mercury can cause <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3701261/">adverse neurological development</a> in unborn babies. Perfluorooctanoic acid is linked to <a href="http://jcem.endojournals.org/content/early/2013/07/17/jc.2013-1282.long">thyroid dysfunction in adults</a>. Cadmium and lead are linked an increased risk of cancer, diabetes and cardiovascular disease. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/28566/original/hzkphxqg-1375432568.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/28566/original/hzkphxqg-1375432568.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/28566/original/hzkphxqg-1375432568.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/28566/original/hzkphxqg-1375432568.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/28566/original/hzkphxqg-1375432568.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/28566/original/hzkphxqg-1375432568.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/28566/original/hzkphxqg-1375432568.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Chemical breakdown.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Exposures to environmental pollutants have been associated with a wide range of diseases including diabetes and cardiovascular disease, but very little is currently known about the impact of small, yet long-term accumulations of chemicals.</p>
<p>We know even less about how complex mixtures of potentially harmful elements will affect our health in the longer term and these cocktails are building up in all of our bodies, regardless of wealth or lifestyle.</p>
<p>Populations living in poverty or of lower socio-economic status have <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935185710213">previously been considered</a> especially at risk from the possible harmful effects of chemical accumulation.</p>
<p>But these new findings indicate that despite not living near to heavily industrialised areas or landfill sites (for example), affluent members of society are similarly at risk from pollutant exposure, even if the specific chemicals involved are different.</p>
<p>A growing mix of novel chemicals, and materials such as nano-particles, are being used in consumer products, including cosmetics, medicines and clothing, and ultimately released into the environment. </p>
<p>Science is currently struggling to keep our understanding of the risks from these elements up-to-date. </p>
<p>With the expanding high-end consumer market, exposure to chemicals is likely to increase the toxicant burden in more affluent members of society. Worryingly we do not know what potential adverse health effects some of these chemicals, either individually or as part of the chemical cocktail, may cause.</p>
<figure>
<iframe src="https://player.vimeo.com/video/71085290" width="500" height="281" frameborder="0" webkitallowfullscreen="" mozallowfullscreen="" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/16645/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Exeter University's European Centre for Environment and Human Health is part financed by the European Regional Development Fund Programme and the European Social Fund Convergence Programme for Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly.</span></em></p>Many people buy high-end, free-range and organic products in a bid to cut down on the amount of chemicals in their bodies. But chemicals can accumulate from a range of sources, and new research suggests…Jessica Tyrrell, Associate Research Fellow, University of ExeterLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.