RESUMEN
Human biomonitoring (HBM) data measured in specific contexts or populations provide information for comparing population exposures. There are numerous health-based biomonitoring guidance values, but to locate these values, interested parties need to seek them out individually from publications, governmental reports, websites and other sources. Until now, there has been no central, international repository for this information. Thus, a tool is needed to help researchers, public health professionals, risk assessors, and regulatory decision makers to quickly locate relevant values on numerous environmental chemicals. A free, on-line repository for international health-based guidance values to facilitate the interpretation of HBM data is now available. The repository is referred to as the "Human Biomonitoring Health-Based Guidance Value (HB2GV) Dashboard". The Dashboard represents the efforts of the International Human Biomonitoring Working Group (i-HBM), affiliated with the International Society of Exposure Science. The i-HBM's mission is to promote the use of population-level HBM data to inform public health decision-making by developing harmonized resources to facilitate the interpretation of HBM data in a health-based context. This paper describes the methods used to compile the human biomonitoring health-based guidance values, how the values can be accessed and used, and caveats with using the Dashboard for interpreting HBM data. To our knowledge, the HB2GV Dashboard is the first open-access, curated database of HBM guidance values developed for use in interpreting HBM data. This new resource can assist global HBM data users such as risk assessors, risk managers and biomonitoring programs with a readily available compilation of guidance values.
Asunto(s)
Monitoreo Biológico , Monitoreo del Ambiente , Humanos , Monitoreo del Ambiente/métodos , Salud Global , Salud PúblicaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are transferred from mother to infants through breastfeeding, a time when children may be particularly vulnerable to PFAS-mediated adverse health effects. Infants can also be exposed to PFAS from infant formula consumption. Our recent literature-based scoping of breast milk levels reported that four PFAS often exceeded the United States Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) children's drinking water screening levels in both the general population and highly impacted communities in the U.S. and Canada. This work presents a comparison of global breast milk and infant formula PFAS measurements with the only reported health-based drinking water screening values specific to children. METHODS: We focused on four PFAS for which ATSDR has developed children's drinking water screening values: PFOA (perfluorooctanoic acid), PFOS (perfluorooctanesulfonic acid), PFHxS (perfluorohexanesulfonic acid), and PFNA (perfluorononanoic acid). Published literature on PFAS levels in breast milk and infant formula were identified via PubMed searches. Data were compared to children's drinking water screening values. DISCUSSION: Breast milk concentrations of PFOA and PFOS often exceed children's drinking water screening values, regardless of geographic location. The limited information on infant formula suggests its use does not necessarily result in lower PFAS exposures, especially for formulas reconstituted with drinking water containing PFAS. Unfortunately, individuals generally cannot know whether their infant's exposures exceed children's drinking water screening values. Thus, it is essential that pregnant and lactating women and others, especially those having lived in PFAS-contaminated communities, have data required to make informed decisions on infant nutrition. An international monitoring effort and access to affordable testing are needed for breast milk, drinking water and infant formula to fully understand infant PFAS exposures. Currently, our understanding of demonstrable methods for reducing exposures to emerging PFAS is limited, making this research and the communications surrounding it even more important.
Asunto(s)
Ácidos Alcanesulfónicos , Agua Potable , Contaminantes Ambientales , Fluorocarburos , Lactante , Niño , Embarazo , Humanos , Femenino , Estados Unidos , Leche Humana/química , Agua Potable/análisis , Fórmulas Infantiles , Lactancia , Fluorocarburos/análisisRESUMEN
The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in an extraordinary incidence of morbidity and mortality, with almost 6 million deaths worldwide at the time of this writing (https://covid19.who.int/). There has been a pressing need for research that would shed light on factors - especially modifiable factors - that could reduce risks to human health. At least several hundred studies addressing the complex relationships among transmission of SARS-CoV-2, air pollution, and human health have been published. However, these investigations are limited by available and consistent data. The project goal was to seek input into opportunities to improve and fund exposure research on the confluence of air pollution and infectious agents such as SARS-CoV-2. Thirty-two scientists with expertise in exposure science, epidemiology, risk assessment, infectious diseases, and/or air pollution responded to the outreach for information. Most of the respondents expressed value in developing a set of common definitions regarding the extent and type of public health lockdown. Traffic and smoking ranked high as important sources of air pollution warranting source-specific research (in contrast with assessing overall ambient level exposures). Numerous important socioeconomic factors were also identified. Participants offered a wide array of inputs on what they considered to be essential studies to improve our understanding of exposures. These ranged from detailed mechanistic studies to improved air quality monitoring studies and prospective cohort studies. Overall, many respondents indicated that these issues require more research and better study design. As an exercise to solicit opinions, important concepts were brought forth that provide opportunities for scientific collaboration and for consideration for funding prioritization. Further conversations on these concepts are needed to advance our thinking on how to design research that moves us past the documented limitations in the current body of research and prepares us for the next pandemic.