Effects of Dutch livestock production on human health and the environment.

Observed multiple adverse effects of livestock production have led to increasing calls for more sustainable livestock production. Quantitative analysis of adverse effects, which can guide public debate and policy development in this area, is limited and generally scattered across environmental, human health, and other science domains. The aim of this study was to bring together and, where possible, quantify and aggregate the effects of national-scale livestock production on 17 impact categories, ranging from impacts of particulate matter, emerging infectious diseases and odor annoyance to airborne nitrogen deposition on terrestrial nature areas and greenhouse gas emissions. Effects were estimated and scaled to total Dutch livestock production, with system boundaries including feed production, manure management and transport, but excluding slaughtering, retail and consumption. Effects were expressed using eight indicators that directly express Impact in the sense of the Drivers-Pressures-State-Impact-Response framework, while the remaining 14 express Pressures or States. Results show that livestock production may contribute both positively and negatively to human health with a human disease burden (expressed in disability-adjusted life years) of up to 4% for three different health effects: those related to particulate matter, zoonoses, and occupational accidents. The contribution to environmental impact ranges from 2% for consumptive water use in the Netherlands to 95% for phosphorus transfer to soils, and extends beyond Dutch borders. While some aggregation across impact categories was possible, notably for burden of disease estimates, further aggregation of disparate indicators would require normative value judgement. Despite difficulty of aggregation, the assessment shows that impacts receive a different contribution of different animal sectors. While some of our results are country-specific, the overall approach is generic and can be adapted and tuned according to specific contexts and information needs in other regions, to allow informed decision making across a broad range of impact categories.

Dietary intake and risk evaluation of polybrominated diphenyl ethers in The Netherlands.

The current study aims at estimating the dietary intake of PBDEs in the Netherlands and evaluating the resultant risk. Dietary intake was estimated using results of PBDE analyses in Dutch food products from 2003/2004 and consumption data of the third Dutch National Food Consumption Survey (1997/1998). Assuming that non-detects represent levels of half the detection limit, the median long-term intake of the Dutch population of the sum of five major PBDEs (namely PBDEs 47, 99, 100, 153+154) is 0.79 ng/kg body weight bw/day (P97.5: 1.62 ng/kg bw/day). When non-detects are considered as zeros the values are 0.53 (median) and 1.34 (P97.5) ng/kg bw/day. Environmental concentrations of PBDEs in Europe are expected to decline in the near future because of the ban on penta- and octaBDE technical products. However, it will take at least a decade before this will result in lower PBDE concentrations in food products. Hence, a regular monitoring program for PBDEs is recommended. A risk evaluation at the most sensitive endpoints of BDE 99 carried out in this paper indicates that, although the long-term exposure to BDE 99 is well below the human exposure threshold level for neurodevelopmental toxicity, it may be close to that for reproductive toxicity.

The use of the DR CALUX bioassay and indicator polychlorinated biphenyls for screening of elevated levels of dioxins and dioxin-like polychlorinated biphenyls in eel.

The DR CALUX bioassay is a very suitable screening method for dioxins and dioxin-like-PCBs in feed and food. This was, e. g. demonstrated in a survey in the Netherlands to control the dioxin levels in eel. The DR CALUX assay, but also indicator polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) were evaluated as a screening method. Based on the limit for polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins/dibenzofurans (PCDD/F) [at that time 8 pg toxic equivalents (TEQ)/g eel], and the relation between PCDD/F and dioxin-like-PCB, a decision limit of 30 pg TEQ/g eel was used for screening of 153 field samples. Suspected samples (21) and part of the higher contaminated negative samples (35) were analyzed by GC/MS for dioxins, non-ortho, mono-ortho and indicator PCB, revealing 13 samples exceeding the action limit of 30 pg TEQ/g eel. Only one sample slightly exceeded the dioxin level of 8 pg TEQ/g eel. The relatively low sensitivity for mono-ortho PCB was overcome by the use of reference samples, as shown by the correlation of 0.93 between GC/MS and CALUX determined total TEQ levels. The present data show that the DR CALUX assay can be used for screening of total TEQ levels in eel. The use for dioxins only requires a safe, and therefore relatively low, decision limit. The indicator PCB also showed a good correlation with total TEQ levels, mainly due to the large contribution of the mono-ortho PCB at higher concentrations. The relation with dioxins was very poor and as such indicator PCB seem less suitable than the DR CALUX assay for screening for dioxins only. The present study clearly shows that part of the wild eel samples contains high total TEQ levels and will exceed the future European Union limit of 12 pg TEQ/g eel for dioxins and dioxin-like PCB. Especially at high TEQ levels, dioxin-like PCB contribute most to the total TEQ. In practice, wild eel presents only a minor part of the eel consumed.