Top-selling scented liquid laundry detergent and scented dryer sheet contains hazardous chemicals, including two that are classified as carcinogens

The same University of Washington researcher who used chemical sleuthing to deduce what’s in fragranced consumer products now has turned her attention to the scented air wafting from household laundry vents.

Findings, published online this week in the journal Air Quality, Atmosphere and Health, show that air vented from machines using the top-selling scented liquid laundry detergent and scented dryer sheet contains hazardous chemicals, including two that are classified as carcinogens.

“This is an interesting source of pollution because emissions from dryer vents are essentially unregulated and unmonitored,” said lead author Anne Steinemann, a UW professor of civil and environmental engineering and of public affairs. “If they’re coming out of a smokestack or tail pipe, they’re regulated, but if they’re coming out of a dryer vent, they’re not.”

The research builds on earlier work that looked at what chemicals are released by laundry products, air fresheners, cleaners, lotions and other fragranced consumer products. Manufacturers are not required to disclose the ingredients used in fragrances, or in laundry products.

For the new study, which focuses on chemicals emitted through laundry vents, researchers first purchased and pre-rinsed new, organic cotton towels. They asked two homeowners to volunteer their washers and dryers, cleaned the inside of the machines with vinegar, and ran full cycles using only water to eliminate as much residue as possible.

At the first home, they ran a regular laundry cycle and analyzed the vent fumes for three cases: once with no products, once with the leading brand of scented liquid laundry detergent, and finally with both the detergent and a leading brand of scented dryer sheets. A canister placed inside the dryer vent opening captured the exhaust 15 minutes into each drying cycle. Researchers then repeated the procedure with a different washer and dryer at a second home.

Analysis of the captured gases found more than 25 volatile organic compounds, including seven hazardous air pollutants, coming out of the vents. Of those, two chemicals – acetaldehyde and benzene – are classified by the Environmental Protection Agency as carcinogens, for which the agency has established no safe exposure level.

“These products can affect not only personal health, but also public and environmental health. The chemicals can go into the air, down the drain and into water bodies,” Steinemann said.

The researchers estimate that in the Seattle area, where the study was conducted, acetaldehyde emissions from this brand of laundry detergent would be equivalent to 3 percent of the total acetaldehyde emissions coming from automobiles. Emissions from the top five brands, they estimate, would constitute about 6 percent of automobiles’ acetaldehyde emissions.

“We focus a lot of attention on how to reduce emissions of pollutants from automobiles,” Steinemann said. “And here’s one source of pollutants that could be reduced.”

The project’s website also includes letters from the public reporting health effects from scented consumer products. Steinemann says that people’s reports of adverse reactions to fragranced air coming from laundry vents motivated her to conduct this study.

Steinemann recommends using laundry products without any fragrance or scent.

Co-authors are Lisa Gallagher and Amy Davis at the UW, and Ian MacGregor at Battelle Memorial Institute.

Literature:

Ann Steinemann, Lisa Gallagher, Amy Davis, Ian MacGregor, University of Washington, Scented laundry products emit hazardous chemicals through dryer vents, Aug. 24, 2011

Professor Ann C. Steinemann: Reduce Exposures Resource Assessment

Related Environmental Medicine Matters Articles:

• Since when do fish use perfume?
• Scented consumer products shown to emit many unlisted chemicals
• The Reckless Self-Interest of the Fragrance Industry
• Secret Chemicals Revaled in Celebrity Perfumes, Teen Body Sprays

Drinking water polluted with toxic industrial chemical

The DuPont Company has agreed to pay $8.3 million to install water filters in nearly 5,000 southern New Jersey homes whose tap water is polluted with the toxic industrial chemical perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), also known as C8.

E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Company settled a class action lawsuit brought by residents of Penns Grove, N.J., who charged that their drinking water had been polluted by perfluorochemicals, including C8, emitted from the company’s Chambers Works facility.

The chemical C8 is a member of a family of synthetic industrial substances called perfluorochemicals, which do not break down in the environment and which pollute drinking water and source water in at least 11 states, according to limited investigations by state water agencies, academic scientists, businesses and journalists.

A byproduct of the manufacture of fluorotelomers, used for stain-repellent textile coatings, non-stick cookware and water and grease-resistant coatings, C8 has been widely found in people and the environment, due to unregulated industrial discharges and leaching from consumer goods and landfills.

Environmental Working Group has campaigned for eight years to restrict perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), a likely human carcinogen, endocrine-disrupting chemical and reproductive toxin that for 50 years.

“For years, thousands of people who live in southern New Jersey have been drinking water polluted with the toxic industrial chemical C8,” EWG senior scientist Olga Naidenko, Ph.D. said. “DuPont has disregarded public health by waiting for a federal court order before providing the community with filtered water. “

On February 1, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency proposed a nationwide plan to require water utilities to test drinking water for 28 contaminants currently unregulated by federal law, including C8 and five other perfluorinated chemicals.

“EPA’s decision to test for C8 in water supplies nationwide is a step in the right direction,” Naidenko said. “We cannot afford to delay protecting Americans from this dangerous chemical any longer.”

-

Literature:

EWG, DuPont to pay $8.3 Million, March 21, 2011

EWG is a nonprofit research organization based in Washington, DC that uses the power of information to protect human health and the environment and can be found at www.ewg.org

Paris, January 25, 2011:

“Le Réseau Environnement Santé – RES” (the French “Environment Health Network”) welcomes the decision of the French Carrefour superstores to replace their bisphenol A-based sales receipts.

According to an exclusive release of the website, it is now up to the 1600 branches of Carrefour to eliminate bisphenol A in their receipts. Carrefour is aligning itself with the recent decision of “Système U” with a deadline also set in February. In doing so, the two retail groups are in advance of lawmakers in the prevention of occupational hazards and the application of the precautionary principle. “RES is pleased with this action, which we hope will spread to the entire retail sector. This is a measure that the State should embrace in order to eliminate once and for all this source of population exposure to BPA “, said Yannick Vicaire.

More generally, RES reiterates its invitation to the relevant sectors of retail distribution and food production to replace BPA in all items likely to be involved in the daily intake of this endocrine disruptor. In doing so, RES appeals to all the economic actors to obtain information on their practices and public policies vis-à-vis Bisphenol A and to allow consumers to make informed choices.

References:

• LSA, Exclusif LSA : Carrefour retire le bisphénol A de ses tickets de caisse et de ses coupons, Jan. 25, 2011
• RES, Les magasins U ouvrent la voie de la substitution et de l’interdiction du Bisphénol A, au-delà des seuls biberons, Dec. 17, 2010

Related Articles:

• European Commission confirms intentions on BPA
• World Health Organization documentation: Joint FAO/WHO meeting, 1-5 November 2010, Food is a major source of exposure to bisphenol A, 9 November 2010
• Industry puts a  higher priority on selling chemicals than on the health of infants
• Lawsuit seeks to ban BPA from Food Packaging

Urgent action needed on dioxins, says toxicologist

The environmental scientist whose work on dioxins last year prompted governments around the world to suspend the use of some pesticides says there is more to the problem and authorities need to act urgently.

Although dioxins have been banned from the ingredients of pesticides in Australia for more than a decade, many dioxins emerged in the manufacturing process and there was no end-stage monitoring to protect consumers and the public, said University of Queensland scientist Dr Caroline Gaus.

Numerous environmental and health issues were associated with undeclared dioxin impurities, said Dr Gaus, an environmental toxicologist with the National Research Institute for Environmental Toxicology (ENTOX).

Little information was available about the impurities because they were created during the production process so were not original ingredients.

“We estimate that the amount of these impurities is relatively high compared to other current dioxin sources, but this cannot be adequately quantified due to the commercial protection of data on pesticides use in Australia and internationally,” Dr Gaus said.

She said pesticides with impurities used in high volumes represented a previously neglected but significant and concerning source of dioxins in the environment. They also posed a risk to the health of people handling pesticides, and to consumers.

“Some of these pesticides contained high concentrations of dioxins, comparable to those known from pesticides which are banned or restricted for use in most countries since the 1980s and 90s,” she said.

Dioxins are linked to a range of cancers and are considered one of the most toxic man-made chemicals. They can cause adverse health effects in humans and wildlife including cancer, and act on development, reproduction and the endocrine system.

Research by Dr Gaus and PhD student Eva Holt last year showed that a wide range of currently used and globally marketed pesticides contained dioxin impurities, despite the widespread belief that modern pesticides were no longer a significant dioxin source.

As a result of their work, a new wave of suspensions, recalls, restrictions and government reviews on pesticide formulations is under way worldwide, including in the United States, Canada, New Zealand and Australia.

The study analysed 23 different pesticide formulations, containing 15 different active ingredients currently used in Australia (plus four formulations that are no longer registered for use in Australia), including insecticides, herbicides and fungicides. Dioxins were detected in all samples, including some commonly used products. Researchers estimate approximately 200 pesticides have the potential to contain dioxins.

The pesticides are used on crops including cotton, potatoes, lettuce, tomatoes, beans and peanuts, as well as in parks and recreation areas, at turf farms and plant nurseries.

“In view of the global manufacturing, distribution and use of pesticides, international regulation and monitoring strategies should be developed and implemented to identify, evaluate, and target pesticide dioxin sources at the manufacturing stage,” Dr Gaus said.

Some Recent Restrictions

The Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) suspended all formulations containing quintozene (pentachloronitrobenzene) from use in April this year due to risk to workers applying the pesticide, which was commonly used on golf courses. The fungicide is under review in New Zealand where it is used on bulbs and turf. The manufacturer recently initiated a voluntary recall of product containing quintozene. The APVMA has recently suspended the pesticide PCNB from sale and a stop sale order has been issued by the US Environmental Protection Agency.

About Dioxins

• Dioxins are toxic compounds which have adverse health effects in humans and wildlife. They can elicit adverse health effects at low levels (cancer, immunotoxicity, reproduction, endocrine function, development).
• These toxicants are managed under the international Stockholm Convention treaty which aims to protect human health and the environment by reducing and eliminating dioxin release to the environment. More than 150 countries, including Australia, have ratified the Stockholm Convention treaty since 2004.
• Most chlorinated pesticides have the potential to contain dioxins if manufactured under certain conditions and processes (e.g. > 150 ºC, alkaline conditions, process including chlorine) – the US EPA lists 161 chemicals (but it is not complete – PCNB for example is not listed). Thus, pesticides were considered historical sources of dioxins and contemporary monitoring data in most current-use pesticides are lacking.
• Dioxin impurities can vary between manufacturing facility, batch, year and country due to variations in production processes and conditions.

About the Research

• 23 different formulations containing 15 different active ingredients currently used in Australia (plus 4 formulations that are no longer registered for use in Australia), including insecticides, herbicides and fungicides, were analysed. Dioxins were detected in all samples. These include commonly used pesticides, such as PCNB, MCPA, 2,4-D, chlorothalonil and triclopyr/picloram. Others are Fluroxypyr, Mecoprop, Flumetsulam, Imazamox, Prochloraz, Fenamisphos, Chlorpyrifos, Lindane; 2,4-D; 2,4-DB; Chlorthal amd Quintozene.
• Some of these pesticide formulations contained high concentrations of dioxins, comparable to those known from pesticides which are banned or restricted for use in most countries since the 1980/90s.
• Highest dioxin (1,100-2,000 mg/tonne AI) and TEQ (2,400-5,700 µg/tonne AI) concentrations were found in the fungicide quintozene (also known as pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB)).
• Dioxin concentrations in PCNB are comparable to those known from the banned pesticides 2,4,5-T (trichlorophenoxyacetic acid; the key ingredient of Agent Orange). Note: TEQ concentrations in PCNB are at the lower end for those known for 2,4,5-T (approaching the 7,000 µg/tonne used under the Stockholm Convention to estimate historical dioxin releases via past use of 2,4,5-T).
• There are about 6000 pesticide products on the market in Australia (containing ~2000 different active ingredients) – the UQ/ENTOX scientists analysed only a small proportion (0.4 per cent) of these.
• Dioxin concentrations in other pesticides analysed ranged from 61-190 ug TEQ/tonne AI. Impurity concentrations may vary considerably depending on the conditions employed during pesticide production and should therefore be monitored regularly.
• As many pesticides are used in high volumes, they can represent previously neglected but important sources of dioxins to the environment and pose a risk to the health of people handling pesticides.
• Based on these findings, the APVMA have recently suspended the pesticide PCNB, due to dioxin contamination and the associated risks to pesticide applicators. Similarly, the US EPA have issued a stop sale order for PCNB.
• The estimated release of dioxins from the use of PCNB is 27 g TEQ/year (10-90th percentile range: 14-110 g TEQ/year). The dioxin release from this pesticide alone ranks among the top 5 dioxin sources to land in Australia (range 28-110 g TEQ/year).
• The greatest source of uncertainty with these estimates is the lack of information on pesticide use volumes in Australia, which is commercial in confidence and thus not publicly available. This is why the dioxin release associated with many of the pesticides analysed by the UQ/ENTOX scientists could not be estimated to date (has to be modelled)
• The cumulative dioxin release associated with high volume-use of different pesticides may be an important source of dioxins, even if pesticides contain lower dioxin levels than PCNB, e.g. if all pesticide products were contaminated at levels ranging from 100-10,000 µg TEQ/tonne AI and used at a total of 200,000 tonnes per year, then the annual dioxin release would be between 20 and 2000 g TEQ/year.

Note: data on the amount of pesticides used in Australia is not publicly available (commercial in confidence), total pesticide use may be considerably higher than 200,000 tonnes (approximately 2.25 million tonnes of pesticides a year are used in the USA, including 1.18 million tonnes per year of chlorine and hypochlorite pesticides).

The study was funded by an Australian Research Council Discovery Grant and undertaken by the National Research Institute for Environmental Toxicology, University of Queensland (Eva Holt, Caroline Gaus) in collaboration with the National Measurement Institute in Sydney (Gavin Stevenson) and collaborators from Germany (Roland Weber).

The United Nations Environmental Protection Agency has used the data from the study to develop a burden of toxicology measure for use worldwide. It helps identify and prioritise dioxin sources.

Reference:

University of Queensland, Urgent action needed on dioxins, says toxicologist, December 6, 2010

Related Articles:

• Submissions sought on review of Organophosphate Insecticide Dichlorvos
• Chemical Threat: Groups call for Pesticide Ban
• Anxiety in adult female mice following perinatal exposure to Chlorpyrifos
• EFSA publishes European overview of Dioxin Levels in Food and Feed

Young people who are overexposed to antibacterial soaps containing triclosan may suffer more allergies, and exposure to higher levels of Bisphenol A among adults may negatively influence the immune system, a new University of Michigan School of Public Health study suggests.

Triclosan is a chemical compound widely used in products such as antibacterial soaps, toothpaste, pens, diaper bags and medical devices. Bisphenol A (BPA) is found in many plastics and, for example, as a protective lining in food cans. Both of these chemicals are in a class of environmental toxicants called endocrine-disrupting compounds (EDCs), which are believed to negatively impact human health by mimicking or affecting hormones.

Using data from the 2003-2006 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, U-M researchers compared urinary BPA and triclosan with cytomegalovirus (CMV) antibody levels and diagnosis of allergies or hay fever in a sample of U.S. adults and children over age 6. Allergy and hay fever diagnosis and CMV antibodies were used as two separate markers of immune alterations.

“We found that people over age 18 with higher levels of BPA exposure had higher CMV antibody levels, which suggests their cell-mediated immune system may not be functioning properly,” said Erin Rees Clayton, research investigator at the U-M School of Public Health and first author on the paper.

Researchers also found that people age 18 and under with higher levels of triclosan were more likely to report diagnosis of allergies and hay fever.

There is growing concern among the scientific community and consumer groups that these EDCs are dangerous to humans at lower levels than previously thought.

“The triclosan findings in the younger age groups may support the ‘hygiene hypothesis,’ which maintains living in very clean and hygienic environments may impact our exposure to micro-organisms that are beneficial for development of the immune system,” said Allison Aiello, associate professor at the U-M School of Public Health and principal investigator on the study.

As an antimicrobial agent found in many household products, triclosan may play a role in changing the micro-organisms to which we are exposed in such a way that our immune system development in childhood is affected.

“It is possible that a person can be too clean for their own good,” said Aiello, who is also a visiting associate professor of epidemiology at Harvard.

Previous animal studies indicate that BPA and triclosan may affect the immune system, but this is the first known study to look at exposure to BPA and triclosan as it relates to human immune function, Aiello said.

One surprise finding is that with BPA exposure, age seems to matter, said Rees Clayton. In people 18 or older, higher amounts of BPA were associated with higher CMV levels, but in people younger than 18 the reverse was true.

“This suggests the timing of the exposure to BPA and perhaps the quantity and length of time we are exposed to BPA may be affecting the immune system response,” Rees Clayton said.

This is just the first step, she said, but a very important one. Going forward, researchers would like to study the long-term effects of BPA and triclosan in people to see if they can establish a causal relationship.

One limitation of the study is that it measured disease and exposure simultaneously and thus shows only part of the picture, Aiello said.

“It is possible, for example, that individuals who have an allergy are more hygienic because of their condition, and that the relationship we observed is, therefore, not causal or is an example of reverse causation,” Aiello said.

Reference:

University of Michigan, Study suggests that being too clean can make people sick, 29, Nov. 2010

The paper, “The Impact of Bisphenol A and Triclosan on Immune Parameters in the U.S. Population,” appears online in Environmental Health Perspectives Nov. 30.

See podcast explaining more about Bisphenol A and triclosan (live Nov. 29)

Related articles:

• Anti Bacterials = Anti Health
• European Commission confirms intentions on BPA
• Industry puts higher priority on selling chemicals than on health of infants
• Researchers renew call for governmental agencies to identify all products with BPA

Brussels, 22 November 2010 – The Health and Environment Alliance (HEAL) welcomes a news report that the European Commission has launched discussions on a ban on Bisphenol A in baby bottles.

In an exclusive report in Food Quality News, European Commission is quoted as saying that it wants to introduce a region-wide ban on the use of Bisphenol A (BPA) in baby bottles. (1)

“If this is true, it is a step in the right direction,” says Lisette van Vliet, Toxics Policy Advisor at HEAL. “But this only relates to baby bottles. The ban should be for ALL food packaging for infants under 3 years old – and it should quickly be extended to all food packaging because, if babies during pregnancy are to be protected, consumption by women of child-bearing age should be avoided.”

HEAL was disappointed earlier this month by the outcome of the World Health Organization expert meeting in Ottawa, Canada, 1-5 November 2010 on Bisphenol A. The WHO opinion was that it would be premature to take any action on Bisphenol A on public health grounds. (2)

HEAL board member, André Cicollela, Réseau Environnement Santé (RES) said: “The conclusion is very surprising because it gives the impression that the scientific evidence is not available. This is far from the reality: almost 500 peer-reviewed studies have been published.” (3)

Many of the studies show increased risks for a plethora of health effects from breast and prostate cancer, diabetes and obesity, behavioural and reproductive problems, at doses well below the current ‘tolerable daily intakes’ advised by the US EPA and the European Food Safety Authority. The WHO reasoning is based on a dismissal of the importance of peoples’ daily and continual exposure to this chemical. Moreover, more than 80 studies show that the levels of internal contamination in people are equivalent to levels that produce the mentioned health effects in animal studies. (3)

In September, the European food panel failed to protect EU citizen’s health from plastic component, BPA. (4)

Prior to that HEAL was a signatory to a joint letter sent to EFSA from scientists and organisations across the globe expressed concerns and concluded that. Based on the available scientific studies, reducing levels of human exposure to BPA was necessary.

Contacts:

Lisette van Vliet– Toxics Policy Advisor, Health and Environment Alliance (HEAL):

+32 (0)2 234 3643, mobile: 32 (0)484 614 528, lisette@env-health.org

Diana Smith, Press and Communications, Health and Environment Alliance, Mobile: +33 6 33 2943, Diana@env-health.org

Reference: HEAL,  Press Release, Commission confirms intentions on BPA, November 22, 2010

Literature:

1. European Commission wants ban on bisphenol A in baby bottles
2. World Health Organization documentation: Joint FAO/WHO meeting, 1-5 November 2010, Food is a major source of exposure to bisphenol A, 9 November 2010
3. Press release (in French) on WHO opinion and European Commission position
4. Press release and letter available at Chemicals Health Monitor

Feinstein Statement on Obstruction of Efforts to Reach Compromise Agreement on Use of BPA in Baby Products

Washington, DC – U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)  issued the following statement on blocked efforts to offer a compromise amendment to phase out the use of bisphenol A (BPA) in baby bottles and sippy cups.

Following is Senator Feinstein’s statement:

“Unfortunately, the compromise agreement on a BPA amendment to the food safety bill has been blocked. Last evening, an agreement between myself and Senator Enzi was reached, which would have:

• Banned the use of BPA in baby bottles and sippy cups (largely because infants and children are the most vulnerable to the harmful effects of BPA),
• Required the FDA to issue a revised safety assessment on BPA by December 1, 2012; and
• Included a savings clause to allow states to enact their own legislation.

I thank Ranking Member Enzi for his agreement. Unfortunately it has become clear that the American Chemistry Council (ACC) has blocked and obstructed the agreement from being added to the Food Safety Bill currently on the floor. Therefore, I cannot carry out the agreement that was reached.

I regret that the ACC puts the sale of chemicals above the safety of infants and children.

This was a small step forward – a simple move to ban BPA in baby bottles and sippy cups. A simple move to protect children. All it did was ban BPA in baby bottles and sippy cups until the FDA safety assessment count be revised.

There is no benefit from having this harmful chemical in baby bottles and sippy cups for infants. I will not cease in my efforts to remove BPA from products where it can harm human health, and I urge consumers to vote with their pocketbooks by refusing to purchase products that contain BPA. This is especially important when it comes to buying products that will be used by infants or children.

However, I am pleased that seven states have taken initiative to phase out or ban BPA. I also commend the manufacturers and retailers who have wisely begun to phase out BPA from children’s products and search for alternatives. At least 14 major manufacturers either offer some BPA-free alternatives for baby bottles and sippy cups, or completely ban its use.

What I have learned from this experience is that compromise is not possible on this issue. I very much regret that the chemical industry puts a higher priority on selling chemicals than on the health of infants.”

Reference:

Senator Dianne Feinstein, Feinstein Statement on Obstruction of Efforts to Reach Compromise Agreement on Use of BPA in Baby Products, November 17, 2010

Photo: Senator Dianne Feinstein

Related Articles:

• Researchers renew call for governmental agencies to identify all products with BPA
• Lawsuit seeks to ban BPA from Food Packaging
• 60 Scientists and NGOs Sound Joint Warning on Plastics Chemical
• …And more about BPA at EMM Blog

New Study Indicates Higher than Predicted Human Exposure to the Toxic Chemical Bisphenol A or BPA

COLUMBIA, Mo. – Researchers have discovered that women, female monkeys and female mice have major similarities when it comes to how bisphenol A (BPA) is metabolized, and they have renewed their call for governmental regulation when it comes to the estrogen-like chemical found in many everyday products.

A study published online in the Sept. 20 NIH journal Environmental Health Perspectives ties rodent data on the health effects of BPA to predictions of human health effects from BPA with the use of everyday household products. The study was authored by researchers at the University of Missouri Division of Biological Sciences, Veterinary Medical Diagnostic Lab (VMDL) and the department of Biomedical Sciences, in collaboration with scientists at the University of California-Davis and Washington State University.

“This study provides convincing evidence that BPA is dangerous to our health at current levels of human exposure,” said Frederick vom Saal, Curators’ professor of biological sciences at the University of Missouri. “The new results clearly demonstrate that rodent data on the health effects of BPA are relevant to predictions regarding the health effects of human exposure to BPA. Further evidence of human harm should not be required for regulatory action to reduce human exposure to BPA.”

BPA is one of the world’s highest production-volume chemicals, with more than 8 billion pounds made per year. It can be found in a wide variety of consumer products, including hard plastic items such as baby bottles and food-storage containers, the plastic lining of food and beverage cans, thermal paper used for receipts, and dental sealants. The findings in the current study suggest that human exposure to BPA is much higher than some prior estimates and is likely to be from many still-unknown sources, indicating the need for governmental agencies to require the chemical industry to identify all products that contain BPA.

Several states, including Connecticut, Massachusetts, Washington, New York and Oregon, have passed bills to reduce exposure to BPA, and similar legislation is pending in the U.S. Congress.

“For years, BPA manufacturers have argued that BPA is safe and have denied the validity of more than 200 studies that showed adverse health effects in animals due to exposure to very low doses of BPA,” said Julia Taylor, lead author and associate research professor at the University of Missouri. “We know that BPA leaches out of products that contain it, and that it acts like estrogen in the body.”

“We’ve assumed we’re getting BPA from the ingestion of contaminated food and beverages,” said co-author Pat Hunt, a professor in the Washington State University School of Molecular Biosciences. “This indicates there must be a lot of other ways in which we’re exposed to this chemical and we’re probably exposed to much higher levels than we have assumed.”

The research team at the University of Missouri includes Taylor, vom Saal and student researcher Bertram Drury in Biological Sciences, as well as Wade Welshons in Biomedical Sciences and George Rottinghaus in the VMDL at MU.

Reference:

University of Missouri, New Study Indicates Higher than Predicted Human Exposure to the Toxic Chemical Bisphenol A or BPA, September 20th, 2010.

Related articles:

• Impact of chemical BPA in dental sealants used in children
• Lawsuit seeks to ban BPA from food packaging
• 60 Scientists and NGOs Sound Joint Warning on Plastics Chemical
• Everyday Exposure to Dangerous Levels of Toxic Chemical BPA Unavoidable
• Yale: Why BPA leached from ’safe’ plastics may damage health of female offspring
• Study shows: Plastics chemical retards growth, function of adult reproductive cells

Dentists should take precautions to reduce potential absorption of BPA from dental resins

Researchers from Mount Sinai School of Medicine have found that bisphenol A (BPA) released from some plastic resins used in pediatric dentistry is detectable in the saliva after placement in children’s mouths. BPA is a widely used synthetic chemical that has been associated with changes in behavior, prostate and urinary tract development, and early onset of puberty. The findings are published in the current issue of Pediatrics.

Resins containing BPA are commonly used in preventive and restorative oral care. Children often have their teeth sealed with a dental resin containing BPA to prevent cavities, and it is often used for fillings. Led by Philip Landrigan, MD, Dean for Global Health, Professor and Chair of Preventive Medicine, and Director of the Children’s Environmental Health Center at Mount Sinai School of Medicine, the research team conducted a literature review and found that BPA was detectable in saliva for up to three hours after the dental work was completed.

“BPA is commonly used in dental products, and while exposure from dental materials is much less common than from food storage products, we are still concerned,” said Dr. Landrigan. “These dental products are still safe and an effective way to promote good oral health, but dentists should take precautions to reduce potential absorption of this chemical and the negative side effects associated with it.”

Dr. Landrigan’s team reviewed toxicology data over the last 10 years to examine the benefits and potential childhood health risks of using dental materials containing BPA. They determined that dental products contain different derivatives of BPA, and that saliva breaks down the derivative into BPA during the dental procedure and for three hours following it. As a further precaution the authors urge that resins containing BPA not be applied in women during pregnancy.

The authors caution that these results are preliminary, and that data on the absorption of BPA in the body were not available. “Further research is needed to fully grasp the impact of BPA in dental products, and to analyze all dental products that use this chemical,” continued Dr. Landrigan. “However, the overwhelming benefit of these dental resins in oral health outweighs the brief exposure to BPA. Dentists should continue to use these products, but manufacturers should disclose specific information about the chemical structures of these products and search for alternatives.”

To reduce exposure, the authors recommend the use of one BPA derivative called bis-GMA over another, bis-DMA, as bis-GMA seems to pose less risk. They also recommend that dentists rub the surface of the materials with pumice to remove the top liquefied layer of the sealant. Another preventive measure would be to encourage the patient to rinse for 30 seconds immediately following the procedure to prevent saliva from breaking the chemical down into BPA.

Literature:

The Mount Sinai Hospital / Mount Sinai School of Medicine, Mount Sinai researchers analyze impact of chemical BPA in dental sealants used in children, Sept. 10, 2010.

More research should focus on BPA and health effects in adults

In one of the first human studies of its kind, researchers have found that urinary concentrations of the controversial chemical Bisphenol A, or BPA, may be related to decreased sperm quality and sperm concentration.

However, the researchers are quick to point out that these results are preliminary and more study is needed. Several studies have documented adverse effects of BPA on semen in rodents, but none are known to have reported similar relationships in humans.

BPA is a common chemical that’s stirred much controversy in the media lately over its safety. Critics say that BPA mimics the body’s own hormones and may lead to negative health effects. BPA is most commonly used to make plastics and epoxy resins used in food and beverage cans, and people are exposed primarily through diet, although other routes are possible. More than 6 billion pounds of BPA are produced annually.

The new study suggests that more research should focus on BPA and health effects in adults, says John Meeker, assistant professor of Environmental Health Sciences at the University of Michigan School of Public Health.

Meeker is the lead author on the study, along with Russ Hauser, the Frederick Lee Hisaw Professor of Reproductive Physiology at Harvard School of Public Health. Colleagues at Massachusetts General Hospital and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also contributed to the research.

“Much of the focus for BPA is on the exposures in utero or in early life, which is of course extremely important, but this suggests exposure may also be a concern for adults,” Meeker said. “Research should focus on impacts of exposure throughout multiple life stages.” Meeker and Hauser recruited 190 men through a fertility clinic. All gave spot urine samples and sperm samples the same day. Subsequently, 78 of the men gave one or two additional urine samples a month apart. Researchers detected BPA in 89 percent of the urine samples.

Researchers measured sperm concentration, sperm motility, sperm shape and DNA damage in the sperm cell.

“We found that if we compare somebody in the top quartile of exposure with the lowest quartile of exposure, sperm concentration was on average about 23 percent lower in men with the highest BPA,” Meeker said.

Results also suggested a 10 percent increase in sperm DNA damage.

The results are consistent with a previous study by Meeker and Hauser suggesting that certain hormones, specifically FSH (follicle-stimulating hormone) and Inhibin B, are elevated or decreased in relation to BPA, respectively, a pattern consistent with low sperm production and development.

Meeker stressed that further study is necessary due to the study’s relatively small sample size and design.

“The study from which these data came is currently in progress,” Hauser said. “With a larger sample size and enhanced study design, we will be able to more definitively investigate this preliminary association in the near future.”

Reference:

University of Michigan, Sperm may be harmed by exposure to BPA, study suggests, ANN ARBOR, Mich., Aug. 3, 2010.

Related EMM Articles about BPA:

• Lawsuit seeks to ban BPA from food packaging
• 60 Scientists and NGOs Sound Joint Warning on Plastics Chemical
• Everyday Exposure to Dangerous Levels of Toxic Chemical BPA Unavoidable
• Yale: Why BPA leached from ’safe’ plastics may damage health of female offspring
• Study shows: Plastics chemical retards growth, function of adult reproductive cells