Background: Endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) are found in plastics, personal care products, household items, and other consumer goods. Risk assessments are intended to characterize a chemical's hazards, identify the doses at which adverse outcomes are observed, quantify exposure levels, and then compare these doses to determine the likelihood of risk in a given population. There are many problems with risk assessments for EDCs, allowing people to be exposed to levels that are later associated with serious health outcomes in epidemiology studies.
Objective: In this review, we examine issues that affect the evaluation of EDCs in risk assessments (e.g., use of insensitive rodent strains and absence of disease-oriented outcomes in hazard assessments; inadequate exposure assessments). We then review one well-studied chemical, Bisphenol A (BPA; CAS #80-05-7) an EDC found in plastics, food packaging, and other consumer products. More than one hundred epidemiology studies suggest associations between BPA exposures and adverse health outcomes in environmentally exposed human populations.
Findings: We present support for the use of systematic review methodologies in the evaluation of BPA and other EDCs. Systematic reviews would allow studies to be evaluated for their reliability and risk of bias. They would also allow all data to be used in risk assessments, which is a requirement for some regulatory agencies.
Conclusion: Systematic review methodologies can be used to improve evaluations of BPA and other EDCs. Their use could help to restore faith in risk assessments and ensure that all data are utilized in decision-making. Regulatory agencies are urged to conduct transparent, well-documented and proper systematic reviews for BPA and other EDCs.
Keywords: Klimisch score; National Academy of Sciences; key characteristic; low dose effect; meta-analysis; uterotrophic; xenoestrogen.
Copyright© Bentham Science Publishers; For any queries, please email at email@example.com.