Samet, 2019
Samet, J. M.; “Expert Review Under Attack: Glyphosate, Talc, and Cancer;” American Journal of Public Health, 2019, 109(7), 976-978; DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2019.305131.
Bibliography Tag: analytical methods
Morabia, 2019
Morabia, A.; “Fighting Independent Risk Assessment of Talc and Glyphosate: Whose Benefit Is It Anyway?;” American Journal of Public Health, 2019, 109(7), 955-956; DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2019.305144.
Rodenberg, 2019
Rodenberg, H.; “Reliance, Not Responsibility: Relations Between Science and Industry;” American Journal of Public Health, 2019, 109(7), 980-981; DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2019.305125.
Schaden et al., 2020
Schaden, Helmut Burtscher, Clausing, Peter, & Van Scharen, Hans. “Factsheet: Dangerous Confidence in ‘Good Laboratory Practices,'” February 11, 2020, Corporate Europe Observatory and PAN Germany.
SUMMARY:
Our authorisation system for chemicals is based on the principle that manufacturers must prove, by means of scientifc studies, that their products do not pose unacceptable risks to public health and the environment. It is therefore also the responsibility of manufacturers to commission certifed contract laboratories to carry out the toxicological studies necessary for the approval procedure. As a guarantee against manipulation and falsifcation of these “regulatory” studies, regulatory authorities worldwide rely on the certifed standard of “Good Laboratory Practice” (GLP). This standard provides for strict documentation requirements and regular internal and external controls. However, the current fraud scandal involving a German contract laboratory certifed according to GLP, shows that this trust is unlikely to be justifed. According to reports, GLP studies have been manipulated and falsifed there since 2005.
- Recent research now shows that LPT has also produced studies that were part of the study package for the EU-wide approval of glyphosate in December 2017: One in seven studies in this package, which was the basis to grant re-approval for glyphosate, came from LPT. These fndings are worrying in two ways: – On the one hand, there is the fundamental question of whether the risk assessments for medicines, pesticides and chemicals based on LPT studies can be trusted.
- Even more worrying is the general realisation that laboratories, despite the supposedly “tamper-proof” GLP standard, are apparently able to falsify studies over years and decades without being noticed by the control authorities.
The classifcation of glyphosate as “non-carcinogenic” and “not genotoxic“o is based, among other things, on the European authorities’ full confdence in the GLP system. In the EU assessment proces GLP studies were automatically classifed as reliable; This in stark contrast with the numerous “non-GLP studies” from university research, peer reviewed and published, most of which reported evidence of a genotoxic effect and an increased risk of lymphatic cancer in users of glyphosate, were disqualifed by the authorities as “unreliable“.
The LPT counterfeiting scandal reveals the failure of a regulatory system, that places the commissioning and preparation of studies in the hands of industry. At the same time, it confrms the urgency of a fundamental reform of this system for identifying the risks of chemicals, as called for by the European coalition “Citizens for Science in Pesticide Regulation” in October 2018. FULL TEXT
Caiati et al., 2019
Caiati, C., Pollice, P., Favale, S., & Lepera, M. E.; “The Herbicide Glyphosate and Its Apparently Controversial Effect on Human Health: An Updated Clinical Perspective;” Endocrine, Metabolic, and Immune Disorders: Drug Targets, 2019; DOI: 10.2174/1871530319666191015191614.
ABSTRACT:
BACKGROUND: Glyphosate (G) is the most common weed-killer in the world. Every year tons and tons of G are applied on crop fields. G was first introduced in the mid 1970s and since then its usage has gradually increased to reach a peak since 2005. Now G usage is approximately 100 -fold what it was in 1970. Its impact on human health was considered benign at the beginning. But over the years, evidence of a pervasive negative effect of this pesticide on humans has been mounting. Nonetheless, G usage is allowed by government health control agencies (both in the United States and Europe), that rely upon the evidence produced by the G producer. However, the IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer) in 2015 has stated that G is probable carcinogenic (class 2A), the second highest class in terms of risk.
OBJECTIVE: In this review, we explore the effect of G on human health, focusing in particular on more recent knowledge.
RESULTS: We have attempted to untangle the controversy about the dangers of the product for human beings in view of a very recent development, when the so -called Monsanto Papers, consisting of Emails and memos from Monsanto came to light, revealing a coordinated strategy to manipulate the debate about the safety of glyphosate to the company’s advantage.
CONCLUSIONS: The story of G is a recurrent one (see the tobacco story), that seriously jeopardizes the credibility of the scientific study in the modern era.
Cuhra, 2015
Cuhra, M.; “Glyphosate nontoxicity: the genesis of a scientific fact;” Journal of Biological Physics and Chemistry, 2015, 15(3), 89-96; DOI: 10.4024/08CU15A.jbpc.15.03.
ABSTRACT:
Repetition of a 1978 experiment on the toxicity of glyphosate chemicals in water-flea Daphnia magna showed surprising results. In the 31 years which had passed between the two series of experiments, the toxicity of glyphosate had apparently become 300 times stronger! Further investigation into this enigmatic paradox discloses unfortunate aspects of laboratory researcher cultures as well as fundamental challenges in current regulatory approval of chemicals and the epistemology of risk-assessment. FULL TEXT
Vermeulen et al., 2020
Vermeulen, R., Schymanski, E. L., Barabasi, A. L., & Miller, G. W.; “The exposome and health: Where chemistry meets biology;” Science, 2020, 367(6476), 392-396; DOI: 10.1126/science.aay3164.
ABSTRACT:
Despite extensive evidence showing that exposure to specific chemicals can lead to disease, current research approaches and regulatory policies fail to address the chemical complexity of our world. To safeguard current and future generations from the increasing number of chemicals polluting our environment, a systematic and agnostic approach is needed. The “exposome” concept strives to capture the diversity and range of exposures to synthetic chemicals, dietary constituents, psychosocial stressors, and physical factors, as well as their corresponding biological responses. Technological advances such as high-resolution mass spectrometry and network science have allowed us to take the first steps toward a comprehensive assessment of the exposome. Given the increased recognition of the dominant role that nongenetic factors play in disease, an effort to characterize the exposome at a scale comparable to that of the human genome is warranted. FULL TEXT
Escher et al., 2020
Escher, B. I., Stapleton, H. M., & Schymanski, E. L.; “Tracking complex mixtures of chemicals in our changing environment;” Science, 2020, 367(6476), 388-392; DOI: 10.1126/science.aay6636.
ABSTRACT:
Chemicals have improved our quality of life, but the resulting environmental pollution has the potential to cause detrimental effects on humans and the environment. People and biota are chronically exposed to thousands of chemicals from various environmental sources through multiple pathways. Environmental chemists and toxicologists have moved beyond detecting and quantifying single chemicals to characterizing complex mixtures of chemicals in indoor and outdoeor environments and biological matrices. We highlight analytical and bioanalytical approaches to isolating, characterizing, and tracking groups of chemicals of concern in complex matrices. Techniques that combine chemical analysis and bioassays have the potential to facilitate the identification of mixtures of chemicals that pose a combined risk. FULL TEXT
Chung and Herceg, 2020
Chung, F. F., & Herceg, Z.; “The Promises and Challenges of Toxico-Epigenomics: Environmental Chemicals and Their Impacts on the Epigenome;” Environmental Health Perspectives, 2020, 128(1), 15001; DOI: 10.1289/EHP6104.
ABSTRACT:
BACKGROUND: It has been estimated that a substantial portion of chronic and noncommunicable diseases can be caused or exacerbated by exposure to environmental chemicals. Multiple lines of evidence indicate that early life exposure to environmental chemicals at relatively low concentrations could have lasting effects on individual and population health. Although the potential adverse effects of environmental chemicals are known to the scientific community, regulatory agencies, and the public, little is known about the mechanistic basis by which these chemicals can induce long-term or transgenerational effects. To address this question, epigenetic mechanisms have emerged as the potential link between genetic and environmental factors of health and disease.
OBJECTIVES: We present an overview of epigenetic regulation and a summary of reported evidence of environmental toxicants as epigenetic disruptors. We also discuss the advantages and challenges of using epigenetic biomarkers as an indicator of toxicant exposure, using measures that can be taken to improve risk assessment, and our perspectives on the future role of epigenetics in toxicology.
DISCUSSION: Until recently, efforts to apply epigenomic data in toxicology and risk assessment were restricted by an incomplete understanding of epigenomic variability across tissue types and populations. This is poised to change with the development of new tools and concerted efforts by researchers across disciplines that have led to a better understanding of epigenetic mechanisms and comprehensive maps of epigenomic variation. With the foundations now in place, we foresee that unprecedented advancements will take place in the field in the coming years.
Kasiotis and Machera, 2015
Kasiotis, K. M., & Machera, K.; “Neonicotinoids and their Metabolites in Human Biomonitoring: A Review;” Hellenic Plant Protection Journal, 2015, 8(2), 33-45; DOI: 10.1515/hppj-2015-0006.
ABSTRACT:
Neonicotinoids (NNDs) constitute a major class of insecticides with a broad and versatile spectrum of applications in agriculture. Hence, their residues are found in several environmental compartments and can be transferred via several pathways to numerous organisms. Despite their profound impact on honeybees and wild bees (impairment of memory, impact on immune system), their presence in humans is far less reported, possibly due to the low to moderate toxicological eff ects that they elicit. The aim of the present review is to emphasize on developments in the biomonitoring of NNDs. It focuses mainly on chromatographic analysis of NNDs and their metabolites in human biological fl uids, discussing key features, such as sample preparation and analytical method validation. Nonetheless, case reports regarding intoxication incidents are presented, highlighting the signifi cance of such cases especially in the developing world. FULL TEXT