An expert assessment on climate change and health - with a European focus on lungs and allergies.

BACKGROUND: For almost 20 years, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has been assessing the potential health risks associated with climate change; with increasingly convincing evidence that climate change presents existing impacts on human health. In industrialized countries climate change may further affect public health and in particular respiratory health, through existing health stressors, including, anticipated increased number of deaths and acute morbidity due to heat waves; increased frequency of cardiopulmonary events due to higher concentrations of air pollutants; and altered spatial and temporal distribution of allergens and some infectious disease vectors. Additionally exposure to moulds and contaminants from water damaged buildings may increase. METHODS: We undertook an expert elicitation amongst European researchers engaged in environmental medicine or respiratory health. All experts were actively publishing researchers on lung disease and air pollution, climate and health or a closely related research. We conducted an online questionnaire on proposed causal diagrams and determined levels of confidence that climate change will have an impact on a series of stressors. In a workshop following the online questionnaire, half of the experts further discussed the results and reasons for differences in assessments of the state of knowledge on exposures and health effects. RESULTS: Out of 16 experts, 100% expressed high to very high confidence that climate change would increase the frequency of heat waves. At least half expressed high or very high confidence that climate change would increase levels of pollen (50%), particulate matter (PM2.5) (55%), and ozone (70%). While clarity is needed around the impacts of increased exposures to health impacts of some stressors, including ozone and particulate matter levels, it was noted that definitive knowledge is not a prerequisite for policy action. Information to the public, preventive measures, monitoring and warning systems were among the most commonly mentioned preventative actions. CONCLUSIONS: This group of experts identifies clear health risks associated with climate change, and express opinions about these risks even while they do not necessarily regard themselves as covering all areas of expertise. Since some changes in exposure have already been observed, the consensus is that there is already a scientific basis for preventative action, and that the associated adaptation and mitigation policies should also be evidence based.

Environmental exposure to xenoestrogens and oestrogen related cancers: reproductive system, breast, lung, kidney, pancreas, and brain.

The role of steroids in carcinogenesis has become a major concern in environmental protection, biomonitoring, and clinical research. Although historically oestrogen has been related to development of reproductive system, research over the last decade has confirmed its crucial role in the development and homeostasis of other organ systems. As a number of anthropogenic agents are xenoestrogens, environmental health research has focused on oestrogen receptor level disturbances and of aromatase polymorphisms. Oestrogen and xenoestrogens mediate critical points in carcinogenesis by binding to oestrogen receptors, whose distribution is age-, gender-, and tissue-specific. This review brings data about cancer types whose eatiology may be found in environmental exposure to xenoestrogens. Cancer types that have been well documented in literature to be related with environmental exposure include the reproductive system, breast, lung, kidney, pancreas, and brain. The results of our data mining show (a) a significant correlation between exposure to xenoestrogens and increased, gender-related, cancer risk and (b) a need to re-evaluate agents so far defined as endocrine disruptors, as they are also key molecules in carcinogenesis. This revision may be used to further research of cancer aetiology and to improvement of related legislation. Investigation of cancers caused by xenoestrogens may elucidate yet unknown mechanisms also valuable for oncology and the development of new therapies.

We're only in it for the knowledge? A problem solving turn in environment and health expert elicitation.

BACKGROUND: The FP6 EU HENVINET project aimed at synthesizing the scientific information available on a number of topics of high relevance to policy makers in environment and health. The goal of the current paper is to reflect on the methodology that was used in the project, in view of exploring the usefulness of this and similar methodologies to the policy process. The topics investigated included health impacts of the brominated flame retardants decabrominated diphenylether (decaBDE) and hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD), phthalates highlighting di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP), the pesticide chlorpyrifos (CPF), nanoparticles, the impacts of climate change on asthma and other respiratory disorders, and the influence of environment health stressors on cancer induction. METHODS: Initially the focus was on identifying knowledge gaps in the state of the art in scientific knowledge. Literature reviews covered all elements that compose the causal chain of the different environmental health issues from emissions to exposures, to effects and to health impacts. Through expert elicitation, knowledge gaps were highlighted by assessing expert confidence using calibrated confidence scales. During this work a complementary focus to that on knowledge gaps was developed through interdisciplinary reflections. By extending the scope of the endeavour from only a scientific perspective, to also include the more problem solving oriented policy perspective, the question of which kind of policy action experts consider justifiable was addressed. This was addressed by means of a questionnaire. In an expert workshop the results of both questionnaires were discussed as a basis for policy briefs. RESULTS: The expert elicitation, the application of the calibrated confidence levels and the problem solving approach were all experienced as being quite challenging for the experts involved, as these approaches did not easily relate to mainstream environment and health scientific practices. Even so, most experts were quite positive about it. In particular, the opportunity to widen one's own horizon and to interactively exchange knowledge and debate with a diversity of experts seemed to be well appreciated in this approach. Different parts of the approach also helped in focussing on specific relevant aspects of scientific knowledge, and as such can be considered of reflective value. CONCLUSIONS: The approach developed by HENVINET was part of a practice of learning by doing and of interdisciplinary cooperation and negotiation. Ambitions were challenged by unforeseen complexities and difference of opinion and as no Holy Grail approach was at hand to copy or follow, it was quite an interesting but also complicated endeavour. Perfection, if this could be defined, seemed out of reach all the time. Nevertheless, many involved were quite positive about it. It seems that many felt that it fitted some important needs in current science when addressing the needs of policy making on such important issues, without anyone really having a clue on how to actually do this. Challenging questions remain on the quality of such approach and its product. Practice tells us that there probably is no best method and that the best we can do is dependent on contextual negotiation and learning from experiences that we think are relevant.

Chlorpyrifos and neurodevelopmental effects: a literature review and expert elicitation on research and policy.

BACKGROUND: Organophosphate pesticides are widely used on food crops grown in the EU. While they have been banned from indoor use in the US for a decade due to adverse health effects, they are still the most prevalent pesticides in the EU, with Chlorpyrifos (CPF) being the most commonly applied. It has been suggested CPF affects neurodevelopment even at levels below toxicity guidelines. Younger individuals may be more susceptible than adults due to biological factors and exposure settings. METHODS: A literature review was undertaken to assess the evidence for CPF contributing to neurodevelopmental disorders in infants and children. Other literature was consulted in order to formulate a causal chain diagram showing the origins, uptake, and neurological effects of animal and human exposure to CPF.The causal chain diagram and a questionnaire were distributed online to scientific experts who had published in relevant areas of research. They were asked to assess their confidence levels on whether CPF does in fact contribute to adverse neurodevelopment outcomes and rate their confidence in the scientific evidence. A second questionnaire queried experts as to which kind of policy action they consider justifiable based on current knowledge. In a special workshop session at the EuroTox congress in Dresden in 2009 the results of both questionnaires were further discussed with invited experts, as a basis for a policy brief with main messages for policy makers and stakeholders. RESULTS: Most experts who responded to the first questionnaire felt that there was already enough evidence to support a ban on indoor uses of CPF in the EU. However, most felt additional research is still required in several areas. The responses from the first questionnaire were used to formulate the second questionnaire addressing the feasibility of government action. In turn, these expert participants were invited to attend a special session at the EuroTox congress in Dresden in 2009. CONCLUSIONS: Some of the evidence that CPF contributes to neurodevelopmental disorders is still disputed among experts, and the overall sense is that further research and public awareness are warranted. There have been campaigns in North America making the potential exposure concerns known, but such information is not widely known in the EU. The ability of government action to produce change is strongly felt in some quarters while others believe better knowledge of consumer use trends would have a greater impact.

Thyroid hormone metabolism and environmental chemical exposure.

BACKGROUND: Polychlorinated dioxins and -furans (PCDD/Fs) and polychlorinated-biphenyls (PCBs) are environmental toxicants that have been proven to influence thyroid metabolism both in animal studies and in human beings. In recent years polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) also have been found to have a negative influence on thyroid hormone metabolism. The lower brominated flame retardants are now banned in the EU, however higher brominated decabromo-diphenyl ether (DBDE) and the brominated flame retardant hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD) are not yet banned. They too can negatively influence thyroid hormone metabolism. An additional brominated flame retardant that is still in use is tetrabromobisphenol-A (TBBPA), which has also been shown to influence thyroid hormone metabolism.Influences of brominated flame retardants, PCDD/F's and dioxin like-PCBs (dl-PCB's) on thyroid hormone metabolism in adolescence in the Netherlands will be presented in this study and determined if there are reasons for concern to human health for these toxins. In the period 1987-1991, a cohort of mother-baby pairs was formed in order to detect abnormalities in relation to dioxin levels in the perinatal period. The study demonstrated that PCDD/Fs were found around the time of birth, suggesting a modulation of the setpoint of thyroid hormone metabolism with a higher 3,3', 5,5'tetrathyroxine (T4) levels and an increased thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH). While the same serum thyroid hormone tests (- TSH and T4) were again normal by 2 years of age and were still normal at 8-12 years, adolescence is a period with extra stress on thyroid hormone metabolism. Therefore we measured serum levels of TSH, T4, 3,3',5- triiodothyronine (T3), free T4 (FT4), antibodies and thyroxine-binding globulin (TBG) in our adolescent cohort. METHODS: Vena puncture was performed to obtain samples for the measurement of thyroid hormone metabolism related parameters and the current serum dioxin (PCDD/Fs), PCB and PBDE levels. RESULTS: The current levels of T3 were positively correlated to BDE-99. A positive trend with FT4 and BDE-99 was also seen, while a positive correlation with T3 and dl-PCB was also seen. No correlation with TBG was seen for any of the contaminants. Neither the prenatal nor the current PCDD/F levels showed a relationship with the thyroid parameters in this relatively small group. CONCLUSION: Once again the thyroid hormone metabolism (an increase in T3) seems to have been influenced by current background levels of common environmental contaminants: dl-PCBs and BDE-99. T3 is a product of target organs and abnormalities might indicate effects on hormone transporters and could cause pathology. While the influence on T3 levels may have been compensated, because the adolescents functioned normal at the time of the study period, it is questionable if this compensation is enough for all organs depending on thyroid hormones.

Policy relevant results from an expert elicitation on the health risks of phthalates.

BACKGROUND: The EU 6th Framework Program (FP)-funded Health and Environment Network (HENVINET) aimed to support informed policy making by facilitating the availability of relevant knowledge on different environmental health issues. An approach was developed by which scientific agreement, disagreement, and knowledge gaps could be efficiently identified, and expert advice prepared in a way that is usable for policy makers. There were two aims of the project: 1) to apply the tool to a relevant issue; the potential health impacts of the widely used plasticizers, phthalates, and 2) to evaluate the method and the tool by asking both scientific experts and the target audience, namely policy makers and stakeholders, for their opinions. METHODS: The tool consisted of an expert consultation in several steps on the issue of phthalates in environmental health. A diagram depicting the cause-effect chain, from the production and use of phthalates to potential health impacts, was prepared based on existing reviews. This was used as a basis for an online questionnaire, through which experts in the field were consulted. The results of this first round of consultation laid the foundation for a new questionnaire answered by an expert panel that, subsequently, also discussed approaches and results in a workshop. One major task of the expert panel was to pinpoint priorities from the cause-effect chain according to their impact on the extent of potential health risks and their relevance for reducing uncertainty. The results were condensed into a policy brief that was sent to policy makers and stakeholders for their evaluation. RESULTS: The experts agreed about the substantial knowledge gaps within the field of phthalates. The top three priorities for further research and policy action were: 1) intrauterine exposure, 2) reproductive toxicology, and 3) exposure from medical devices. Although not all relevant information from the cause-effect chain is known for phthalates, most experts thought that there are enough indications to justify a precautionary approach and to restrict their general use. Although some of the experts expressed some scepticism about such a tool, most felt that important issues were highlighted. CONCLUSIONS: The approach used was an efficient way at summarising priority knowledge gaps as a starting point for health risk assessment of compounds, based on their relevance for the risk assessment outcome. We conclude that this approach is useful for supporting policy makers with state-of-the-art scientific knowledge weighed by experts. The method can assist future evidence-based policy making.

Policy relevant results from an expert elicitation on the human health risks of decabromodiphenyl ether (decaBDE) and hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD).

AIM: Apply a recently developed expert elicitation procedure to evaluate the state of the current knowledge of the two brominated flame retardants (BFRs) most commonly used today; decabromo-diphenyl ether (decaBDE) and hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD) and their potential impact on human health in order to support policy considerations. This expert elicitation was organized by the HENVINET (Health and Environment Network) Consortium. METHOD: The HENVINET expert elicitation procedure that was used in the evaluations of decaBDE and HBCD is a rapid assessment tool aimed at highlighting areas of agreement and areas of disagreement on knowledge-related key issues for environment and health policy decision making. RESULTS: The outcome of the expert consultation on BFRs was concrete expert advice for policy makers with specific priorities for further action made clear for both stakeholders and policy makers. The experts were not in agreement whether or not the knowledge currently available on decaBDE or HBCD is sufficient to justify policy actions, but most experts considered that enough data already exists to support a ban or restriction on the use of these compounds. All experts agreed on the necessity of more research on the compounds. Priority issues for further research were, among others:• more studies on the extent of human exposure to the compounds.• more studies on the fate and concentration in the human body of the compounds.

Diagnosing and prioritizing uncertainties according to their relevance for policy: the case of transgene silencing.

Uncertainty often becomes problematic when science is used to support decision making in the policy process. Scientists can contribute to a more constructive approach to uncertainty by making their uncertainties transparent. In this article, an approach to systematic uncertainty diagnosis is demonstrated on the case study of transgene silencing and GMO risk assessment. Detailed interviews were conducted with five experts on transgene silencing to obtain quantitative and qualitative information on their perceptions of the uncertainty characterising our knowledge of the phenomena. The results indicate that there are competing interpretations of the cause-effect relationships leading to gene silencing (model structure uncertainty). In particular, the roles of post-transcriptional gene silencing, position effects, DNA-DNA interactions, direct-repeat DNA structures, recognition factors and dsRNA and aberrant zRNA are debated. The study highlights several sources of uncertainty beyond the statistical uncertainty commonly reported in risk assessment. The results also reveal a discrepancy between the way in which uncertainties would be prioritized on the basis of the uncertainty analysis conducted, and the way in which they would be prioritized on the basis of expert willingness to pay to eliminate uncertainty. The results also reveal a diversity of expert opinions on the uncertainty characterizing transgene silencing. Because the methodology used to diagnose uncertainties was successful in revealing a broad spectrum of uncertainties as well as a diversity of expert opinion, it is concluded that the methodology used could contribute to increasing transparency and fostering a critical discussion on uncertainty in the decision making process.

Categorizing mistaken false positives in regulation of human and environmental health.

One of the concerns often voiced by critics of the precautionary principle is that a widespread regulatory application of the principle will lead to a large number of false positives (i.e., over-regulation of minor risks and regulation of nonexisting risks). The present article proposes a general definition of a regulatory false positive, and seeks to identify case studies that can be considered authentic regulatory false positives. Through a comprehensive review of the science policy literature for proclaimed false positives and interviews with authorities on regulation and the precautionary principle we identified 88 cases. Following a detailed analysis of these cases, we found that few of the cases mentioned in the literature can be considered to be authentic false positives. As a result, we have developed a number of different categories for these cases of "mistaken false positives," including: real risks, "The jury is still out," nonregulated proclaimed risks, "Too narrow a definition of risk," and risk-risk tradeoffs. These categories are defined and examples are presented in order to illustrate their key characteristics. On the basis of our analysis, we were able to identify only four cases that could be defined as regulatory false positives in the light of today's knowledge and recognized uncertainty: the Southern Corn Leaf Blight, the Swine Flu, Saccharin, and Food Irradiation in relation to consumer health. We conclude that concerns about false positives do not represent a reasonable argument against future application of the precautionary principle.

Elicitation of expert judgments of uncertainty in the risk assessment of herbicide-tolerant oilseed crops.

One of the lay public's concerns about genetically modified (GM) organisms (GMO) and related emerging technologies is that not all the important risks are evaluated or even identified yet--and that ignorance of the unanticipated risks could lead to severe environmental or public health consequences. To some degree, even the scientists who participated in the analysis of the risks from GMOs (arguably the people most qualified to critique these analyses) share some of this concern. To formally explore the uncertainty in the risk assessment of a GM crop, we conducted detailed interviews of seven leading experts on GM oilseed crops to obtain qualitative and quantitative information on their understanding of the uncertainties associated with the risks to agriculture from GM oilseed crops (canola or rapeseed). The results of these elicitations revealed three issues of potential concern that are currently left outside the scope of risk assessments. These are (1) the potential loss of the agronomic and environmental benefits of glyphosate (a herbicide widely used in no-till agriculture) due to the combined problems of glyphosate-tolerant canola and wheat volunteer plants, (2) the growing problem of seed lot contamination, and (3) the potential market impacts. The elicitations also identified two areas where knowledge is insufficient. These are: the occurrence of hybridization between canola and wild relatives and the ability of the hybrids to perpetuate themselves in nature, and the fate of the herbicide-tolerance genes in soil and their interaction with soil microfauna and -flora. The methodological contribution of this work is a formal approach to analyzing the uncertainty surrounding complex problems.