Human exposure, hazard and risk of alternative plasticizers
Alternative plasticizers to phthalate esters have been used for over a decade, but data regarding emissions, human exposure and health effects are limited. Here we review 20 alternative plasticizers in current use and their human exposure, hazard and risk.
Human exposure, hazard and risk of alternative plasticizers
Provide and discuss information on physicochemical properties, production volume, use, emissions, indoor fate, human exposure and health concerns of alternative plasticizers. 2. Address their human risk potential and their persistent/bioaccumulative/toxic (PBT) properties. 3. Specify data gaps that need to be filled to improve these assessments. 2.
Nonphthalate Plasticizers in House Dust from Multiple
Specific objectives of this work were to (1) characterize plasticizer contamination profiles in house dust and understand region-specific contamination status and characteristics and (2) estimate human exposure risks to the nonphthalate plasticizers via dust ingestion and dermal contact.
Human exposure, hazard and risk of alternative plasticizers
There is an increasing trend in the total use of alternative plasticizers in Sweden compared to common phthalate esters in the last 10 years, especially for DINCH. Evaluative indoor fate modeling reveals that most alternatives are distributed to vertical surfaces (e.g. walls or ceilings). Only TXIB and GTA are predicted to be predominantly
Human exposure, hazard and risk of alternative plasticizers
Alternative plasticizers to phthalate esters have been used for over a decade, but data regarding emissions, human exposure and health effects are limited. Here we review 20 alternative plasticizers in current use and their human exposure, hazard and risk. Physicochemical properties are collated for these diverse alternatives and log KOW values
- Are alternative plasticizers safe?
- Toxicity profiles were extensive but still showed data gaps, mostly regarding carcinogenicity and endocrine disruption (Table 1 A). According to current knowledge, the use of alternative plasticizers seems to be of low risk for humans as calculated risk ratios were mostly well below 1.
- Are plasticizers a risk factor for human exposure?
- Human exposure risks to emerging plasticizers require better elucidations. This needs better characterization of chemical-specific exposure pathways and appropriate exposure markers. As we discussed earlier, the plasticizers may differ greatly in their dominant exposure pathways due to specific applications and unlike physicochemical properties.
- Are alternative phthalate plasticizers toxic?
- Most long-term DNELs of alternative plasticizers are relatively high compared to DEHP (one of the most toxic phthalate plasticizers). Also other phthalates (DINP, DIDP, DPHP) were less toxic than DEHP, having higher DNELs. For DBA, COMGHA, DOS and DBS no hazard was identified due to the extremely low toxicities measured.
- Do plasticizers have a long-term toxicity?
- However, for plasticizers in particular, constant production and emission can lead to continuous exposure and pseudo-persistence. Attention should be paid to TEHPA, ESBO and TCP due to persistence, high exposure (to infants) and toxicity, respectively.
- Do alternative plasticizers metabolize phthalates and DINCH?
- For instance, the human metabolism of phthalates and DINCH is well known. Therefore, exposure to these substances can be well assessed by measuring relevant metabolites in human matrices like blood or urine. Unfortunately, this has not been done for all relevant alternative plasticizers.
- Are biobased plasticizers safe?
- Biobased plasticizers, (66−68) such as soyabean oil, castor oil (as examples provide in previous paragraph), cardanol, and isosorbide, can provide safe alternatives based on their hypotoxicity, renewability, degradability, and plasticizing performances. (68) Preventing regrettable substitutions is a considerable challenge for scientists globally.
