As scientists, health professionals, and other experts who have devoted decades to understanding toxic threats to the development of children's brains, we conclude that the presence and impact of toxic chemical additives to plastics, and potentially microplastics themselves, on children's brains and bodies, constitute a significant public health concern. Here, we present evidence supporting the call to take actions to protect children from harm and offer recommendations to reduce the production, use, and toxicity of plastics as one way to reduce children's exposures to these chemicals and to microplastics.

Hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD) is a brominated flame retardant, that is added, but not chemically bonded, to consumer products. HBCD is sold as a commercial-grade HBCD mixture containing three major stereoisomers: alpha (α), beta (β), and gamma (γ), with relative amounts of 12

BACKGROUND:Exposomics is a conceptual framework positioned at the intersection of environmental health sciences and precision medicine. It seeks to comprehensively understand how environmental exposures and the body's response to these exposures impact human health across the life course. Introduced in 2005, the exposome concept represents a paradigm shift from single-pollutant studies to an integrated approach considering a broad range of exposures. OBJECTIVES:This commentary explores the ongoing efforts to operationalize the exposome, with a focus on NIH initiatives aimed at building capacity in exposomics research and integrating lifecourse exposure data into health research. METHODS:This commentary draws on a structured review of current NIH funding opportunities, initiatives, and strategic documents related to exposomics. Key NIH-supported projects and collaborations were identified through analysis of publicly available agency reports, grant announcements, and program descriptions. Additional insights were gathered from relevant literature and international research activities to contextualize the NIH's role in promoting exposomics and integrating life-course exposure data into health research. DISCUSSION:Operationalizing the exposome is essential for advancing the field of environmental health and precision medicine. NIH-supported initiatives, alongside international collaborations, aim to standardize methodologies, develop tools, and promote interdisciplinary research. Addressing the complexities of exposomics requires integrating diverse datasets and fostering global coordination, paving the way for innovative strategies to improve human health outcomes. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP15561.

Multiple diseases in children have been linked to manufactured synthetic chemicals, which are subject to few legal or policy constraints. A revamping of law and restructuring of the chemical industry are required.

The 18th International Congress on Combustion Byproducts and Human Health Effects (PIC2024) was held in Durham, North Carolina on May 20th-22nd, 2024. The overall goal of this conference, typically organized biannually, is to bring together scholars and researchers from diverse fields including chemistry, toxicology, engineering, epidemiology, and occupational and public health, and from various sectors (academia, government, and industry) to engage on new and emerging issues related to combustion processes, human exposure, and potential health risks. The theme of the 18th International Congress was "Fire Emissions & Community Impacts at the Wildland Urban Interface and Disaster Sites." Specific focus and emphasis was placed on new research concerning wildland fires, climate change, firefighter exposures, and data collected following the East Palestine train derailment in Ohio. Plenary speakers included Drs. Toddi Steelman (Duke University), Daniel Jaffe (University of Washington), Miriam Calkins (NIOSH), Mark Durno (U.S. EPA), and Linda S. Birnbaum (NIEHS, retired). This report summarizes the primary research highlighted during the conference, major discussion points raised, and areas recommended for future research.

BACKGROUND:In 2015, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) received and then, in 2017, granted a petition under the Federal Hazardous Substances Act to declare certain groups of consumer products as banned hazardous substances if they contain nonpolymeric, additive organohalogen flame retardants (OFRs). The petitioners asked the CPSC to regulate OFRs as a single chemical class with similar health effects. The CPSC later sponsored a National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) report in 2019, which ultimately identified 161 OFRs and grouped them into 14 subclasses based on chemical structural similarity. In 2021, a follow-up discussion was held among a group of scientists from both inside and outside of the CPSC for current research on OFRs and to promote collaboration that could increase public awareness of CPSC work and support the class-based approach for the CPSC's required risk assessment of OFRs. OBJECTIVES:Given the extensive data collected to date, there is a need to synthesize what is known about OFR and how class-based regulations have previously managed this information. This commentary discusses both OFR exposure and OFR toxicity and fills some gaps for OFR exposure that were not within the scope of the NASEM report. The objective of this commentary is therefore to provide an overview of the OFR research presented at SOT 2021, explore opportunities and challenges associated with OFR risk assessment, and inform CPSC's work on an OFR class-based approach. DISCUSSION:A class-based approach for regulating OFRs can be successful. Expanding the use of read-across and the use of New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) in assessing and regulating existing chemicals was considered as a necessary part of the class-based process. Recommendations for OFR class-based risk assessment include the need to balance fire and chemical safety and to protect vulnerable populations, including children and pregnant women. The authors also suggest the CPSC should consider global, federal, and state OFR regulations. The lack of data or lack of concordance in toxicity data could present significant hurdles for some OFR subclasses. The potential for cumulative risks within or between subclasses, OFR mixtures, and metabolites common to more than one OFR all add extra complexity for class-based risk assessment. This commentary discusses scientific and regulatory challenges for a class-based approach suggested by NASEM. This commentary is offered as a resource for anyone performing class-based assessments and to provide potential collaboration opportunities for OFR stakeholders. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP12725.

Recent decades have seen a huge rise in human exposure to microwave radiation due to the widespread use of mobile and wireless services that enable smartphones and watches, tablets, laptops and digital devices in the home and workplace. The health and safety standards to protect humans from exposure to harmful levels of microwave radiation can be traced to the 1950s. However, research now demonstrates the existence of many adverse health effects, including cancers and neurological disorders, at levels of everyday use by children and adults. We argue that it is long past the time for governments to apply the Precautionary Principle to protect children and adults, especially pregnant women, and to ensure safer levels of exposure for all.

ADVERTISEMENT RETURN TO ISSUEPREVViewpointNEXTThe European Union Ban on Microplastics Includes Artificial Turf Crumb Rubber Infill: Other Nations Should Follow SuitPhilip ZuccaroPhilip ZuccaroDepartment of Environmental Health Sciences, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut 06510, United StatesYale University, New Haven, Connecticut 06520, United StatesMore by Philip Zuccaro, David C. ThompsonDavid C. ThompsonDepartment of Environmental Health Sciences, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut 06510, United StatesMore by David C. Thompson, Jacob de BoerJacob de BoerAmsterdam Institute for Life and Environment, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1085, 1081HV Amsterdam, The NetherlandsMore by Jacob de Boer, Maria LlompartMaria LlompartCRETUS, Department of Analytical Chemistry, Nutrition, and Food Sciences, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, E-15782 Santiago de Compostela, SpainMore by Maria Llompart, Andrew WattersonAndrew WattersonFaculty of Health Sciences and Sport, University of Stirling, Stirling FK9 4LA, ScotlandMore by Andrew Watterson, Robert BilottRobert BilottDepartment of Environmental Health Sciences, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut 06510, United StatesMore by Robert Bilott, Linda S. BirnbaumLinda S. BirnbaumDepartment of Environmental Health Sciences, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut 06510, United StatesNicholas School of the Environment, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27710, United StatesMore by Linda S. Birnbaumhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-5429-5658, and Vasilis Vasiliou*Vasilis VasiliouDepartment of Environmental Health Sciences, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut 06510, United States*[email protected]More by Vasilis VasiliouView Biographyhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-2552-3118Cite this: Environ. Sci. Technol. 2024, 58, 6, 2591–2594Publication Date (Web):February 1, 2024Publication History Received2 January 2024Published online1 February 2024Published inissue 13 February 2024https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.4c00047https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.4c00047article-commentaryACS PublicationsCopyright © 2024 American Chemical Society. This publication is available under these Terms of Use. Request reuse permissions This publication is free to access through this site. Learn MoreArticle Views4428Altmetric-Citations-LEARN ABOUT THESE METRICSArticle Views are the COUNTER-compliant sum of full text article downloads since November 2008 (both PDF and HTML) across all institutions and individuals. These metrics are regularly updated to reflect usage leading up to the last few days.Citations are the number of other articles citing this article, calculated by Crossref and updated daily. Find more information about Crossref citation counts.The Altmetric Attention Score is a quantitative measure of the attention that a research article has received online. Clicking on the donut icon will load a page at altmetric.com with additional details about the score and the social media presence for the given article. Find more information on the Altmetric Attention Score and how the score is calculated. Share Add toView InAdd Full Text with ReferenceAdd Description ExportRISCitationCitation and abstractCitation and referencesMore Options Share onFacebookTwitterWechatLinked InRedditEmail PDF (2 MB) Get e-AlertscloseSUBJECTS:Biopolymers,Bodies of water,Environmental pollution,Materials,Water pollution Get e-Alerts

A February 3, 2023 train derailment and subsequent burn released hazardous chemicals into East Palestine, Ohio. One potential exposure was polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins, dibenzofurans, and coplanar polychlorinated biphenyls (cPCBs), collectively referred to as dioxins. Many studies have linked dioxins to numerous health effects. A pilot study was conducted July 17-18, 2023 to assess residents' serum dioxin levels. Eighteen persons who were White, nonsmokers with a mean age of 55, and 56% female, provided serum for analysis. Measurement of 20 dioxins, furans, and cPCBs congeners was conducted using gas chromatography, isotope dilution, and high-resolution mass spectrometry. A toxic equivalency (TEQ) value for each participant was calculated by multiplying the reported concentration of each congener by its toxic equivalency factor and summing the results. TEQs were compared to 2011-2012 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) data by race/ethnicity, sex, and age group. All participants had serum TEQ values either below or within the range of NHANES values. Mean TEQ values were lower in younger age groups; we observed no sex-specific differences. These pilot data demonstrate that although dioxins may have formed during the derailment, exposures to participants did not increase their TEQ values compared with 2011-2012 NHANES.

The World Health Organization (WHO) assesses potential health risks of dioxin-like compounds using Toxic Equivalency Factors (TEFs). This study systematically updated the relative potency (REP) database underlying the 2005 WHO TEFs and applied advanced methods for quantitative integration of study quality and dose-response. Data obtained from fifty-one publications more than doubled the size of the previous REP database (∼1300 datasets). REP quality and relevance for these data was assessed via application of a consensus-based weighting framework. Using Bayesian dose-response modeling, available data were modeled to produce standardized dose/concentration-response Hill curves. Study quality and REP data were synthesized via Bayesian meta-analysis to integrate dose/concentration-response data, author-calculated REPs and benchmark ratios. The output is a prediction of the most likely relationship between each congener and its reference as model-predicted TEF uncertainty distributions, or the 'best estimate TEF' (BE-TEF). The resulting weighted BE-TEFs were similar to the 2005 TEFs, though provide more information to inform selection of TEF values as well as to provide risk assessors and managers with information needed to quantitatively characterize uncertainty around TEF values. Collectively, these efforts produce an updated REP database and an objective, reproducible approach to support development of TEF values based on all available data.

BACKGROUND:The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) recommended lowering their estimated tolerable daily intake (TDI) for bisphenol A (BPA) 20,000-fold to 0.2 ng/kg body weight (BW)/day. BPA is an extensively studied high production volume endocrine disrupting chemical (EDC) associated with a vast array of diseases. Prior risk assessments of BPA by EFSA as well as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have relied on industry-funded studies conducted under good laboratory practice protocols (GLP) requiring guideline end points and detailed record keeping, while also claiming to examine (but rejecting) thousands of published findings by academic scientists. Guideline protocols initially formalized in the mid-twentieth century are still used by many regulatory agencies. EFSA used a 21st century approach in its reassessment of BPA and conducted a transparent, but time-limited, systematic review that included both guideline and academic research. The German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) opposed EFSA's revision of the TDI for BPA. OBJECTIVES:We identify the flaws in the assumptions that the German BfR, as well as the FDA, have used to justify maintaining the TDI for BPA at levels above what a vast amount of academic research shows to cause harm. We argue that regulatory agencies need to incorporate 21st century science into chemical hazard identifications using the CLARITY-BPA (Consortium Linking Academic and Regulatory Insights on BPA Toxicity) nonguideline academic studies in a collaborative government-academic program model. DISCUSSION:We strongly endorse EFSA's revised TDI for BPA and support the European Commission's (EC) apparent acceptance of this updated BPA risk assessment. We discuss challenges to current chemical risk assessment assumptions about EDCs that need to be addressed by regulatory agencies to, in our opinion, become truly protective of public health. Addressing these challenges will hopefully result in BPA, and eventually other structurally similar bisphenols (called regrettable substitutions) for which there are known adverse effects, being eliminated from all food-related and many other uses in the EU and elsewhere. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP13812.

Dioxins and dioxin-like compounds measurements were added to polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and organochlo-rine pesticides to expand the exposure profile in a follow-up to the Anniston Community Health Survey (ACHS II, 2014) and to study diabetes associations. Participants of ACHS I (2005-2007) still living within the study area were eligible to participate in ACHS II. Diabetes status (type-2) was determined by a doctor's diagnosis, fasting glucose >= 125 mg/dL, or being on any glycemic control medication. Incident diabetes cases were identified in ACHS II among those who did not have diabetes in ACHS I, using the same criteria. Thirty-five ortho-substituted PCBs, 6 pes-ticides, 7 polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDD), 10 furans (PCDF), and 3 non-ortho PCBs were measured in 338 ACHS II participants. Dioxin toxic equivalents (TEQs) were calculated for all dioxin-like compounds. Main analyses used logistic regression models to calculate odds ratios (OR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI). In models adjusted for age, race, sex, BMI, total lipids, family history of diabetes, and taking lipid lowering medication, the highest ORs for diabetes were observed for PCDD TEQ: 3.61 (95 % CI: 1.04, 12.46), dichloro-diphenyl dichloroethylene (p,p'-DDE): 2.07 (95 % CI 1.08, 3.97), and trans-Nonachlor: 2.55 (95 % CI 0.93, 7.02). The OR for sum 35 PCBs was 1.22 (95 % CI: 0.58-2.57). To complement the main analyses, we used BKMR and g-computation models to evaluate 12 mixture components including 4 TEQs, 2 PCB subsets and 6 pesticides; suggestive positive associations for the joint effect of the mixture analyses resulted in ORs of 1.40 (95% CI:-1.13, 3.93) for BKMR and 1.32 (95% CI:-1.12, 3.76) for g-computation. The mixture analyses provide further support to previously observed associations of trans-Nonachlor, p,p'-DDE, PCDD TEQ and some PCB groups with diabetes.

Background Hazard identification, risk assessment, regulatory, and policy activity are usually conducted on a chemical-by-chemical basis. Grouping chemicals into categories or classes is an underutilized approach that could make risk assessment and management of chemicals more efficient for regulators. Objective and methods While there are some available methods and regulatory frameworks that include the grouping of chemicals (e.g.,same molecular mechanism or similar chemical structure) there has not been a comprehensive evaluation of these different approaches nor a recommended course of action to better consider chemical classes in decision-making. This manuscript: 1) reviews current national and international approaches to grouping; 2) describes how groups could be defined based on the decision context (e.g., hazard/risk assessment, restrictions, prioritization, product development) and scientific considerations (e.g., intrinsic physical-chemical properties); 3) discusses advantages of developing a decision tree approach for grouping; 4) uses ortho-phthalates as a case study to identify and organize frameworks that could be used across agencies; and 5) discusses opportunities to advance the class concept within various regulatory decision-making scenarios. Results Structural similarity was the most common grouping approach for risk assessment among regulatory agencies (national and state level) and non-regulatory organizations, albeit with some variations in its definition. Toxicity to the same target organ or to the same biological function was also used in a few cases. The phthalates case study showed that a decision tree approach for grouping should include questions about uses regulated by other agencies to encourage more efficient, coherent, and protective chemical risk management. Discussion and conclusion Our evaluation of how classes of chemicals are defined and used identified commonalities and differences based on regulatory frameworks, risk assessments, and business strategies. We also identified that using a class-based approach could result in a more efficient process to reduce exposures to multiple hazardous chemicals and, ultimately, reduce health risks. We concluded that, in the absence of a prescribed method, a decision tree approach could facilitate the selection of chemicals belonging to a pre-defined class (e.g., chemicals with endocrine-disrupting activity; organohalogen flame retardants [OFR]) based on the decision-making context (e.g., regulatory risk management).

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has revised their estimate of the toxicity of bisphenol A (BPA) and, as a result, have recommended reducing the tolerable daily intake (TDI) by 20 000-fold. This would essentially ban the use of BPA in food packaging such as can liners, plastic food containers, and in consumer products. To come to this conclusion, EFSA used a systematic approach according to a pre-established protocol and included all guideline and nonguideline studies in their analysis. They found that Th-17 immune cells increased with very low exposure to BPA and used this endpoint to revise the TDI to be human health protective. A number of regulatory agencies including the European Medicines Agency (EMA) have written formal disagreements with several elements of EFSA's proposal. The European Commission will now decide whether to accept EFSA's recommendation over the objections of EMA. If the Commission accepts EFSA's recommendation, it will be a landmark action using knowledge acquired through independent scientific studies focused on biomarkers of chronic disease to protect human health. The goal of this Perspective is to clearly articulate the monumental nature of this debate and decision and to explain what is at stake. Our perspective is that the weight of evidence clearly supports EFSA's proposal to reduce the TDI by 20 000-fold.

Flame retardants are chemical substances that are intended to mitigate fire safety risks posed by a range of goods including furniture, electronics, and building insulation. There are growing concerns about their effectiveness in ensuring fire safety and the potential harms they pose to human health and the environment. In response to these concerns, on 13 June 2022, a roundtable of experts was convened by the UKRI Six Clean Air Strategic Priorities Fund programme 7. The meeting produced a Consensus Statement that summarises the issues around the use of flame retardants, laying out a series of policy recommendations that should lead to more effective fire safety measures and reduce the human and environmental health risks posed by these potentially toxic chemicals.

Background Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are the subject of a growing body of research with the potential to positively impact public and ecological health. However, to effect positive change, findings must be communicated beyond the scientific community. Objective We sought to (a) evaluate the relationships between communications strategy, media attention, and scholarly citations of PFAS research and (b) offer guidance for researchers and communications professionals who would like to publicize future work and increase its impact. Methods We analyzed 273 peer-reviewed epidemiological studies on PFAS human health impacts with publication years 2018–2020, as collected by a pre-existing database. We investigated whether a press release was issued, open-access status, abstract and press release readability, timing of publication and press release distribution, journal impact factor, study type and sample size, statistical significance of finding(s), number of scholarly citations, and the Altmetric Attention Score (a measure of media attention). Discussion Of papers reporting a statistically significant association with health harm, those with a press release received 20 times more media attention (as assessed by Altmetric scores) than those that did not. However, only 6.2% of all papers and 7.8% of significant papers issued one. Among papers with a press release, media attention was positively correlated with better abstract and press release readability and speed in issuing the press release. Scholarly citations were positively correlated with media attention, presence of a press release, and open-access status. Conclusion Most papers with significant findings on PFAS are published without a press release and receive little or no media attention. This reduces the likelihood that important research is reaching the public and decisionmakers who can translate science into action. Issuing a press release and receiving media attention also appear to increase scholarly citations. We provide recommendations for authors to increase the reach and impact of future papers.