Regulatory decisions on endocrine disrupting chemicals should be based on the principles of endocrinology

Laura N. Vandenberg; Theo Colborn; Tyrone B. Hayes; Jerrold J. Heindel; David R. Jacobs; Duk Hee Lee; John Peterson Myers; Toshi Shioda; Ana M. Soto; Frederick S. vom Saal; Wade V. Welshons; R. Thomas Zoeller

doi:10.1016/j.reprotox.2013.02.002

Regulatory decisions on endocrine disrupting chemicals should be based on the principles of endocrinology

Laura N. Vandenberg, Theo Colborn, Tyrone B. Hayes, Jerrold J. Heindel, David R. Jacobs, Duk Hee Lee, John Peterson Myers, Toshi Shioda, Ana M. Soto, Frederick S. vom Saal, Wade V. Welshons, R. Thomas Zoeller

Epidemiology

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › peer-review

162 Scopus citations

Abstract

For years, scientists from various disciplines have studied the effects of endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) on the health and wellbeing of humans and wildlife. Some studies have specifically focused on the effects of low doses, i.e. those in the range that are thought to be safe for humans and/or animals. Others have focused on the existence of non-monotonic dose-response curves. These concepts challenge the way that chemical risk assessment is performed for EDCs. Continued discussions have clarified exactly what controversies and challenges remain. We address several of these issues, including why the study and regulation of EDCs should incorporate endocrine principles; what level of consensus there is for low dose effects; challenges to our understanding of non-monotonicity; and whether EDCs have been demonstrated to produce adverse effects. This discussion should result in a better understanding of these issues, and allow for additional dialog on their impact on risk assessment.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	1-15
Number of pages	15
Journal	Reproductive Toxicology
Volume	38
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reprotox.2013.02.002
State	Published - Jul 2013

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
The authors gratefully acknowledge the following funding sources: NIH grants GM 087107 (to LNV), ES 08314 (to AMS), ES 010026 (to RTZ), ES 018764 (to FSvS), HL 53560 (to DRJ), UMC MO-VMFC0018 (to WVW), a Susan G. Komen for Cure grant FAS0703860 (to TS), grants from the Mitchell Kapor Foundation , the Cornell-Douglas Foundation , and the Wallace Global Fund (to TBH) and a grant from the Kendeda Foundation (to JPM). The funders had no role in the preparation of this manuscript.

Keywords

Adaptive effect
Epidemiology
Flare
Hormesis
Human exposure
Organizational
Weight of evidence

Access

10.1016/j.reprotox.2013.02.002

OpenUrl availability

Full text

Cite this

Vandenberg, L. N., Colborn, T., Hayes, T. B., Heindel, J. J., Jacobs, D. R., Lee, D. H., Myers, J. P., Shioda, T., Soto, A. M., vom Saal, F. S., Welshons, W. V., & Zoeller, R. T. (2013). Regulatory decisions on endocrine disrupting chemicals should be based on the principles of endocrinology. Reproductive Toxicology, 38, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reprotox.2013.02.002

@article{0043bc395c2849e68a47bcba95ef9c2b,

title = "Regulatory decisions on endocrine disrupting chemicals should be based on the principles of endocrinology",

abstract = "For years, scientists from various disciplines have studied the effects of endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) on the health and wellbeing of humans and wildlife. Some studies have specifically focused on the effects of low doses, i.e. those in the range that are thought to be safe for humans and/or animals. Others have focused on the existence of non-monotonic dose-response curves. These concepts challenge the way that chemical risk assessment is performed for EDCs. Continued discussions have clarified exactly what controversies and challenges remain. We address several of these issues, including why the study and regulation of EDCs should incorporate endocrine principles; what level of consensus there is for low dose effects; challenges to our understanding of non-monotonicity; and whether EDCs have been demonstrated to produce adverse effects. This discussion should result in a better understanding of these issues, and allow for additional dialog on their impact on risk assessment.",

keywords = "Adaptive effect, Epidemiology, Flare, Hormesis, Human exposure, Organizational, Weight of evidence",

author = "Vandenberg, {Laura N.} and Theo Colborn and Hayes, {Tyrone B.} and Heindel, {Jerrold J.} and Jacobs, {David R.} and Lee, {Duk Hee} and Myers, {John Peterson} and Toshi Shioda and Soto, {Ana M.} and {vom Saal}, {Frederick S.} and Welshons, {Wade V.} and Zoeller, {R. Thomas}",

note = "Funding Information: The authors gratefully acknowledge the following funding sources: NIH grants GM 087107 (to LNV), ES 08314 (to AMS), ES 010026 (to RTZ), ES 018764 (to FSvS), HL 53560 (to DRJ), UMC MO-VMFC0018 (to WVW), a Susan G. Komen for Cure grant FAS0703860 (to TS), grants from the Mitchell Kapor Foundation , the Cornell-Douglas Foundation , and the Wallace Global Fund (to TBH) and a grant from the Kendeda Foundation (to JPM). The funders had no role in the preparation of this manuscript. ",

year = "2013",

month = jul,

doi = "10.1016/j.reprotox.2013.02.002",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "38",

pages = "1--15",

journal = "Reproductive Toxicology",

issn = "0890-6238",

publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Regulatory decisions on endocrine disrupting chemicals should be based on the principles of endocrinology

AU - Vandenberg, Laura N.

AU - Colborn, Theo

AU - Hayes, Tyrone B.

AU - Heindel, Jerrold J.

AU - Jacobs, David R.

AU - Lee, Duk Hee

AU - Myers, John Peterson

AU - Shioda, Toshi

AU - Soto, Ana M.

AU - vom Saal, Frederick S.

AU - Welshons, Wade V.

AU - Zoeller, R. Thomas

N1 - Funding Information: The authors gratefully acknowledge the following funding sources: NIH grants GM 087107 (to LNV), ES 08314 (to AMS), ES 010026 (to RTZ), ES 018764 (to FSvS), HL 53560 (to DRJ), UMC MO-VMFC0018 (to WVW), a Susan G. Komen for Cure grant FAS0703860 (to TS), grants from the Mitchell Kapor Foundation , the Cornell-Douglas Foundation , and the Wallace Global Fund (to TBH) and a grant from the Kendeda Foundation (to JPM). The funders had no role in the preparation of this manuscript.

PY - 2013/7

Y1 - 2013/7

N2 - For years, scientists from various disciplines have studied the effects of endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) on the health and wellbeing of humans and wildlife. Some studies have specifically focused on the effects of low doses, i.e. those in the range that are thought to be safe for humans and/or animals. Others have focused on the existence of non-monotonic dose-response curves. These concepts challenge the way that chemical risk assessment is performed for EDCs. Continued discussions have clarified exactly what controversies and challenges remain. We address several of these issues, including why the study and regulation of EDCs should incorporate endocrine principles; what level of consensus there is for low dose effects; challenges to our understanding of non-monotonicity; and whether EDCs have been demonstrated to produce adverse effects. This discussion should result in a better understanding of these issues, and allow for additional dialog on their impact on risk assessment.

AB - For years, scientists from various disciplines have studied the effects of endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) on the health and wellbeing of humans and wildlife. Some studies have specifically focused on the effects of low doses, i.e. those in the range that are thought to be safe for humans and/or animals. Others have focused on the existence of non-monotonic dose-response curves. These concepts challenge the way that chemical risk assessment is performed for EDCs. Continued discussions have clarified exactly what controversies and challenges remain. We address several of these issues, including why the study and regulation of EDCs should incorporate endocrine principles; what level of consensus there is for low dose effects; challenges to our understanding of non-monotonicity; and whether EDCs have been demonstrated to produce adverse effects. This discussion should result in a better understanding of these issues, and allow for additional dialog on their impact on risk assessment.

KW - Adaptive effect

KW - Epidemiology

KW - Flare

KW - Hormesis

KW - Human exposure

KW - Organizational

KW - Weight of evidence

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84874777882&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84874777882&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.reprotox.2013.02.002

DO - 10.1016/j.reprotox.2013.02.002

M3 - Review article

C2 - 23411111

AN - SCOPUS:84874777882

SN - 0890-6238

VL - 38

SP - 1

EP - 15

JO - Reproductive Toxicology

JF - Reproductive Toxicology

ER -

Regulatory decisions on endocrine disrupting chemicals should be based on the principles of endocrinology

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

Access

OpenUrl availability

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this