Search

Humans are nowadays exposed to numerous chemicals in our day-to-day life, including parabens, UV filters, phosphorous flame retardants/plasticizers, bisphenols, phthalates and alternative plasticizers, which can have different adverse effects to human health. Estimating human's exposure to these potentially harmful substances is, therefore, of paramount importance. Human biomonitoring (HBM) is the existing approach to assess exposure to environmental contaminants, which relies on the analysis of specific human biomarkers (parent compounds and/or their metabolic products) in biological matrices from individuals. The main drawback is its implementation, which involves complex cohort studies. A novel approach, wastewater-based epidemiology (WBE), involves estimating exposure from the analysis of biomarkers in sewage (a pooled urine and feces sample of an entire population). One of the key challenges of WBE is the selection of biomarkers which are specific to human metabolism, excreted in sufficient amounts, and stable in sewage. So far, literature data on potential biomarkers for estimating exposure to these chemicals are scattered over numerous pharmacokinetic and HBM studies. Hence, this review provides a list of potential biomarkers of exposure to more than 30 widely used chemicals and report on their urinary excretion rates. Furthermore, the potential and challenges of WBE in this particular field is discussed through the review of pioneer WBE studies, which for the first time explored applicability of this novel approach to assess human exposure to environmental contaminants. In the future, WBE could be potentially applied as an "early warning system", which could promptly identify communities with the highest exposure to environmental contaminants., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (© 2020 The Authors.)

Background: Sunscreens are topical preparations containing one or more compounds that filter, block, reflect, scatter, or absorb ultraviolet (UV) light. Part 2 of this review focuses on the environmental, ecological effects and human toxicities that have been attributed to UV filters., Methods: Literature review using NIH databases (eg, PubMed and Medline), FDA and EPA databases, Google Scholar, the Federal Register , and the Code of Federal Regulations ( CFR )., Limitations: This was a retrospective literature review that involved many different types of studies across a variety of species. Comparison between reports is limited by variations in methodology and criteria for toxicity., Conclusions: In vivo and in vitro studies on the environmental and biological effects of UV filters show a wide array of unanticipated adverse effects on the environment and exposed organisms. Coral bleaching receives considerable attention from the lay press, but the scientific literature identifies potential toxicities of endocrine, neurologic, neoplastic and developmental pathways. These effects harm a vast array of aquatic and marine biota, while almost no data supports human toxicity at currently used quantities (with the exception of contact allergy). Much of these data are from experimental studies or field observations; more controlled environmental studies and long-term human use data are limited. Several jurisdictions have prohibited specific UV filters, but this does not adequately address the dichotomy of the benefits of photoprotection vs lack of eco-friendly, safe, and FDA-approved alternatives., (© 2020 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of Women's Dermatologic Society.)