Addressing systemic problems with exposure assessments to protect the public's health.

BACKGROUND: Understanding, characterizing, and quantifying human exposures to environmental chemicals is critical to protect public health. Exposure assessments are key to determining risks to the general population and for specific subpopulations given that exposures differ between groups. Exposure data are also important for understanding where interventions, including public policies, should be targeted and the extent to which interventions have been successful. In this review, we aim to show how inadequacies in exposure assessments conducted by polluting industries or regulatory agencies have led to downplaying or disregarding exposure concerns raised by communities; that underestimates of exposure can lead regulatory agencies to conclude that unacceptable risks are, instead, acceptable, allowing pollutants to go unregulated; and that researchers, risk assessors, and policy makers need to better understand the issues that have affected exposure assessments and how appropriate use of exposure data can contribute to health-protective decisions. METHODS: We describe current approaches used by regulatory agencies to estimate human exposures to environmental chemicals, including approaches to address limitations in exposure data. We then illustrate how some exposure assessments have been used to reach flawed conclusions about environmental chemicals and make recommendations for improvements. RESULTS: Exposure data are important for communities, public health advocates, scientists, policy makers, and other groups to understand the extent of environmental exposures in diverse populations. We identify four areas where exposure assessments need to be improved due to systemic sources of error or uncertainty in exposure assessments and illustrate these areas with examples. These include: (1) an inability of regulatory agencies to keep pace with the increasing number of chemicals registered for use or assess their exposures, as well as complications added by use of 'confidential business information' which reduce available exposure data; (2) the failure to keep assessments up-to-date; (3) how inadequate assumptions about human behaviors and co-exposures contribute to underestimates of exposure; and (4) that insufficient models of toxicokinetics similarly affect exposure estimates. CONCLUSION: We identified key issues that impact capacity to conduct scientifically robust exposure assessments. These issues must be addressed with scientific or policy approaches to improve estimates of exposure and protect public health.

A science-based agenda for health-protective chemical assessments and decisions: overview and consensus statement.

The manufacture and production of industrial chemicals continues to increase, with hundreds of thousands of chemicals and chemical mixtures used worldwide, leading to widespread population exposures and resultant health impacts. Low-wealth communities and communities of color often bear disproportionate burdens of exposure and impact; all compounded by regulatory delays to the detriment of public health. Multiple authoritative bodies and scientific consensus groups have called for actions to prevent harmful exposures via improved policy approaches. We worked across multiple disciplines to develop consensus recommendations for health-protective, scientific approaches to reduce harmful chemical exposures, which can be applied to current US policies governing industrial chemicals and environmental pollutants. This consensus identifies five principles and scientific recommendations for improving how agencies like the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approach and conduct hazard and risk assessment and risk management analyses: (1) the financial burden of data generation for any given chemical on (or to be introduced to) the market should be on the chemical producers that benefit from their production and use; (2) lack of data does not equate to lack of hazard, exposure, or risk; (3) populations at greater risk, including those that are more susceptible or more highly exposed, must be better identified and protected to account for their real-world risks; (4) hazard and risk assessments should not assume existence of a "safe" or "no-risk" level of chemical exposure in the diverse general population; and (5) hazard and risk assessments must evaluate and account for financial conflicts of interest in the body of evidence. While many of these recommendations focus specifically on the EPA, they are general principles for environmental health that could be adopted by any agency or entity engaged in exposure, hazard, and risk assessment. We also detail recommendations for four priority areas in companion papers (exposure assessment methods, human variability assessment, methods for quantifying non-cancer health outcomes, and a framework for defining chemical classes). These recommendations constitute key steps for improved evidence-based environmental health decision-making and public health protection.

Concentrations in human blood of petroleum hydrocarbons associated with the BP/Deepwater Horizon oil spill, Gulf of Mexico.

During/after the BP/Deepwater Horizon oil spill, cleanup workers, fisherpersons, SCUBA divers, and coastal residents were exposed to crude oil and dispersants. These people experienced acute physiological and behavioral symptoms and consulted a physician. They were diagnosed with petroleum hydrocarbon poisoning and had blood analyses analyzed for volatile organic compounds; samples were drawn 5-19 months after the spill had been capped. We examined the petroleum hydrocarbon concentrations in the blood. The aromatic compounds m,p-xylene, toluene, ethylbenzene, benzene, o-xylene, and styrene, and the alkanes hexane, 3-methylpentane, 2-methylpentane, and iso-octane were detected. Concentrations of the first four aromatics were not significantly different from US National Health and Nutritional Examination Survey/US National Institute of Standards and Technology 95th percentiles, indicating high concentrations of contaminants. The other two aromatics and the alkanes yielded equivocal results or significantly low concentrations. The data suggest that single-ring aromatic compounds are more persistent in the blood than alkanes and may be responsible for the observed symptoms. People should avoid exposure to crude oil through avoidance of the affected region, or utilizing hazardous materials suits if involved in cleanup, or wearing hazardous waste operations and emergency response suits if SCUBA diving. Concentrations of alkanes and PAHs in the blood of coastal residents and workers should be monitored through time well after the spill has been controlled.

Oil in the Gulf of Mexico after the capping of the BP/Deepwater Horizon Mississippi Canyon (MC-252) well.

Evidence of fresh oil from the BP/Deepwater Horizon Mississippi Canyon-252 (MC-252) well was found in the northern Gulf of Mexico up to 1 year and 10 months after it was capped on 15 July 2010. Offshore and coastal samples collected after capping displayed ratios of biomarkers matching those of MC-252 crude oil. Pre- and post-capping samples were compared. Little weathering had occurred, based on the abundance of low-molecular-weight (LMW) n-alkanes and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in the post-capping samples. The occurrence of fresh oil in offshore waters and coastal areas suggest that the MC-252 well continued to leak hydrocarbons into the Gulf of Mexico at least until 22 May 2012, the end of this study period.

Distribution and concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons associated with the BP/Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill, Gulf of Mexico.

We examined the geographic extent of petroleum hydrocarbon contamination in sediment, seawater, biota, and seafood during/after the BP/Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill (April 20-July 15, 2010; 28.736667°N, -88.386944°W). TPH, PAHs, and 12 compound classes were examined, particularly C1-benzo(a)anthracenes/chrysenes, C-2-/C-4-phenanthrenes/anthracenes, and C3-naphthalenes. Sediment TPH, PAHs, and all classes peaked near Pensacola, Florida, and Galveston, Texas. Seawater TPH peaked off Pensacola; all of the above classes peaked off the Mississippi River, Louisiana and Galveston. Biota TPH and PAHs peaked near the Mississippi River; C-3 napthalenes peaked near the spill site. Seafood TPH peaked near the spill site, with PAHs and all classes peaking near Pensacola. We recommend that oil concentrations continued to be monitored in these media well after the spill has ceased to assist in defining re-opening dates for fisheries; closures should be maintained until hydrocarbon levels are deemed within appropriate limits.