Human exposure, hazard and risk of alternative plasticizers to phthalate esters

Alternative plasticizers to phthalate esters have been used for over a decade, but data regarding emissions, human exposure and health effects are limited. Here we review 20 alternative plasticizers in current use and their human exposure, hazard and risk. Physicochemical properties are collated for these diverse alternatives and log KOW values range over 15 orders of magnitude and log KAW and log KOA values over about 9 orders of magnitude. Most substances are hydrophobic with low volatility and are produced in high volumes for use in multiple applications. There is an increasing trend in the total use of alternative plasticizers in Sweden compared to common phthalate esters in the last 10years, especially for DINCH. Evaluative indoor fate modeling reveals that most alternatives are distributed to vertical surfaces (e.g. walls or ceilings). Only TXIB and GTA are predicted to be predominantly distributed to indoor air. Human exposure data are lacking and clear evidence for human exposure only exists for DEHT and DINCH, which show increasing trends in body burdens. Human intake rates are collected and compared with limit values with resulting risk ratios below 1 except for infant's exposure to ESBO. PBT properties of the alternatives indicate mostly no reasons for concern, except that TEHPA is estimated to be persistent and TCP toxic. A caveat is that non-standard toxicological endpoint results are not available and, similar to phthalate esters, the alternatives are likely “pseudo-persistent”. Key data gaps for more comprehensive risk assessment are identified and include: analytical methods to measure metabolites in biological fluids and tissues, toxicological information regarding non-standard endpoints such as endocrine disruption and a further refined exposure assessment in order to consider high risk groups such as infants, toddlers and children.