Dataset Information

A Case study on the utility of predictive toxicology tools in alternatives assessments for hazardous chemicals in children's consumer products.

ABSTRACT: Children's consumer products represent an important exposure source for many toxicants. Chemicals of high concern, as designated by the Washington State Child Safe Product Act include phthalates, Bisphenol A (BPA) and parabens, among others. As regulation and reporting requirements increase, so has demand for safer alternatives. This project examines how predictive toxicology and exposure comparison tools can fill gaps in alternatives assessments for hazardous chemicals found in children's products. Phthalates, parabens, BPA and their alternatives were assessed for endocrine disruption and reproductive toxicity using authoritative lists and US Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) predictive toxicology and exposure comparison tools. Resources included the European Chemical Agency's Endocrine Disruptor Substances of Concern database, Global Harmonization System and Classification of Labeling Chemicals, Quantitative Structural Activity Relationships from the Toxicity Estimation Software Tool, the Toxicological Prioritization Index (ToxPi) score calculated from the ToxCast Database, and No Observable Adverse Effects Levels (NOAELs)/Highest No Effects Levels (HNEL) from animal studies found in the CompTox Chemistry Dashboard. Exposure was assessed using ExpoCast predictions. Though alternatives were rarely included in authoritative lists, predictive toxicology tools suggested that BPA alternatives may not be safer but paraben and phthalate alternatives may be safer. All four paraben and no bisphenol or phthalate alternatives were listed on EPA's Safer Chemical Ingredients List. Overall, we found that predictive toxicology tools help fill gaps for alternatives assessments when existing classifications are incomplete.

SUBMITTER: Smith MN

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6917906 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A Case study on the utility of predictive toxicology tools in alternatives assessments for hazardous chemicals in children's consumer products.

Smith Marissa N MN Cohen Hubal Elaine A EA Faustman Elaine M EM

Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology 20190909 1

Children's consumer products represent an important exposure source for many toxicants. Chemicals of high concern, as designated by the Washington State Child Safe Product Act include phthalates, Bisphenol A (BPA) and parabens, among others. As regulation and reporting requirements increase, so has demand for safer alternatives. This project examines how predictive toxicology and exposure comparison tools can fill gaps in alternatives assessments for hazardous chemicals found in children's produ ...[more]

PMID: 31501452

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLaboratory and human studies raise concerns about endocrine disruption and asthma resulting from exposure to chemicals in consumer products. Limited labeling or testing information is available to evaluate products as exposure sources.ObjectivesWe analytically quantified endocrine disruptors and asthma-related chemicals in a range of cosmetics, personal care products, cleaners, sunscreens, and vinyl products. We also evaluated whether product labels provide information that can be used to select products without these chemicals.MethodsWe selected 213 commercial products representing 50 product types. We tested 42 composited samples of high-market-share products, and we tested 43 alternative products identified using criteria expected to minimize target compounds. Analytes included parabens, phthalates, bisphenol A (BPA), triclosan, ethanolamines, alkylphenols, fragrances, glycol ethers, cyclosiloxanes, and ultraviolet (UV) filters.ResultsWe detected 55 compounds, indicating a wide range of exposures from common products. Vinyl products contained > 10% bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) and could be an important source of DEHP in homes. In other products, the highest concentrations and numbers of detects were in the fragranced products (e.g., perfume, air fresheners, and dryer sheets) and in sunscreens. Some products that did not contain the well-known endocrine-disrupting phthalates contained other less-studied phthalates (dicyclohexyl phthalate, diisononyl phthalate, and di-n-propyl phthalate; also endocrine-disrupting compounds), suggesting a substitution. Many detected chemicals were not listed on product labels.ConclusionsCommon products contain complex mixtures of EDCs and asthma-related compounds. Toxicological studies of these mixtures are needed to understand their biological activity. Regarding epidemiology, our findings raise concern about potential confounding from co-occurring chemicals and misclassification due to variability in product composition. Consumers should be able to avoid some target chemicals-synthetic fragrances, BPA, and regulated active ingredients-using purchasing criteria. More complete product labeling would enable consumers to avoid the rest of the target chemicals.

Project description:The ubiquitous presence of more than 80,000 chemicals in thousands of consumer products used on a daily basis stresses the need for screening a broader set of chemicals than the traditional well-studied suspect chemicals. This high-throughput screening combines stochastic chemical-product usage with mass balance-based exposure models and toxicity data to prioritize risks associated with household products. We first characterize product usage using the stochastic SHEDS-HT model and chemical content in common household products from the CPDat database, the chemical amounts applied daily varying over more than six orders of magnitude, from mg to kg. We then estimate multi-pathways near- and far-field exposures for 5,500 chemical-product combinations, applying an extended USEtox model to calculate product intake fractions ranging from 0.001 to ∼1, and exposure doses varying over more than nine orders of magnitude. Combining exposure doses with chemical-specific dose-responses and reference doses shows that risks can be substantial for multiple home maintenance products, such as paints or paint strippers, for some home-applied pesticides, leave-on personal care products, and cleaning products. Sixty percent of the chemical-product combinations have hazard quotients exceeding 1, and 9% of the combinations have lifetime cancer risks exceeding 10-4 . Population-level impacts of household products ingredients can be substantial, representing 5 to 100 minutes of healthy life lost per day, with users' exposures up to 103 minutes per day. To address this issue, present mass balance-based models are already able to provide exposure estimates for both users and populations. This screening study shows large variations of up to 10 orders of magnitude in impact across both chemicals and product combinations, demonstrating that prioritization based on hazard only is not acceptable, since it would neglect orders of magnitude variations in both product usage and exposure that need to be quantified. To address this, the USEtox suite of mass balance-based models is already able to provide exposure estimates for thousands of product-chemical combinations for both users and populations. The present study calls for more scrutiny of most impacting chemical-product combinations, fully ensuring from a regulatory perspective consumer product safety for high-end users and using protective measures for users.

Project description:BackgroundExposure to non-persistent chemicals in consumer products is ubiquitous and associated with endocrine-disrupting effects. These effects have been linked to infertility and adverse pregnancy outcomes in some studies and could affect couple fecundability, i.e. the capacity to conceive a pregnancy, quantified as time to pregnancy (TTP).Objective and rationaleFew epidemiologic studies have examined the impact of non-persistent chemicals specifically on TTP, and the results of these studies have not been synthesized. We undertook a systematic review to summarize the strength of evidence for associations of common non-persistent chemicals with couple fecundability and to identify gaps and limitations in the literature, with the aim of informing policy decisions and future research.Search methodsWe performed an electronic search of English language literature published between 1 January 2007 and 25 August 2017 in MEDLINE, EMBASE.com, Global Health, DART/TOXLINE, POPLINE and DESTAF. We included human retrospective and prospective cohort, cross-sectional and case-control studies that examined phthalates, bisphenol A, triclosan, triclocarban, benzophenones, parabens and glycol ethers in consumer products, and considered TTP or fecundability as an outcome among women, men and couples conceiving without medical assistance. We excluded editorials, opinion pieces, introductions to special sections, articles that described only lifestyle (e.g. caffeine, stress) or clinical factors (e.g. semen parameters, IVF success). Standardized forms for screening, data extraction and study quality were developed using DistillerSR software and completed in duplicate. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to assess risk of bias and devised additional quality metrics based on specific methodological features of fecundability studies.OutcomesThe search returned 3456 articles. There were 15 papers from 12 studies which met inclusion criteria, of which eight included biomarkers of chemical exposure. Studies varied widely in terms of exposure characterization, precluding a meta-analytic approach. Among the studies that measured exposure using biospecimens, results were equivocal for associations between either male or female phthalate exposure and TTP. There was preliminary support for associations of female exposure to some parabens and glycol ethers and of male exposure to benzophenone with longer TTP, but further research and replication of these results are needed. The results provided little to no indication that bisphenol A, triclocarban or triclosan exposure was associated with TTP.Wider implicationsDespite a growing literature on couple exposure to non-persistent endocrine-disrupting chemicals and fecundability, evidence for associations between biologically measured exposures and TTP is limited. Equivocal results with different non-persistent chemical compounds and metabolites complicate the interpretation of our findings with respect to TTP, but do not preclude action, given the documented endocrine disrupting effects on other reproductive outcomes as well as fetal development. We therefore advocate for common-sense lifestyle changes in which both females and males seeking to conceive minimize their exposure to non-persistent chemicals.Systematic review registration numberCRD42018084304.

Project description:IntroductionExposure to hazardous chemicals released during hairdressing activities from hair care products puts hairdressers at risk of adverse health effects. Safety assessments of hair products are mainly focused on consumers, but exposure for professional hairdressers might be substantially higher.ObjectiveTo identify and assess available research data on inhalation exposures of professional hairdressers.MethodsA systematic search of studies between 1 January 2000 and 30 April 2021 was performed in Medline, Embase, Web of Science and in Cochrane registry, toxicological dossiers of the Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS) of the European Commission as well as the German MAK Commission. Studies reporting quantitative data on airborne concentrations of chemicals in the hairdresser's workplace were considered. The outcome was an airborne concentration of chemicals in the working environment, which was compared, when possible, with current occupational exposure limits (OEL) or guidance levels.ResultsIn total, 23 studies performed in 14 countries were included. The average number of hairdressing salons per study was 22 (range 1-62). Chemicals most frequently measured were formaldehyde (n = 8), ammonia (n = 5), total volatile organic compounds (TVOC) (n = 5), and toluene (n = 4). More than fifty other chemicals were measured in one to three studies, including various aromatic and aliphatic organic solvents, hydrogen peroxide, persulfate, and particulate matter. Most studies reported environmental air concentrations, while personal exposure was measured only in seven studies. The measured air concentrations of formaldehyde, ammonia, and TVOC exceeded OEL or guidance values in some studies. There was large variability in measuring conditions and reported air concentrations differed strongly within and between studies.ConclusionHairdressers are exposed to a wide spectrum of hazardous chemicals, often simultaneously. Airborne concentrations of pollutants depend on salon characteristics such as ventilation and the number of customers but also on used products that are often country- or client-specific. For exposure to formaldehyde, ammonia, and TVOC exceeding OELs or guidance values for indoor air was observed. Therefore, occupational exposure should be taken into account by safety regulations for hair care products.

Dataset Information

A Case study on the utility of predictive toxicology tools in alternatives assessments for hazardous chemicals in children's consumer products.

Publications

A Case study on the utility of predictive toxicology tools in alternatives assessments for hazardous chemicals in children's consumer products.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets