Failure to Launch: The Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

[helvella]

A truly dismal paper reporting the utter failure of the USA to properly investigate endocrine disrupting chemicals.

Front Toxicol. 2022 May 30;4:908439.

doi: 10.3389/ftox.2022.908439. eCollection 2022.

Failure to Launch: The Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Maricel V Maffini 1 , Laura N Vandenberg 2

Affiliations

• PMID: 35707496

• PMCID: PMC9189695

• DOI: 10.3389/ftox.2022.908439

Free PMC article

Abstract

It has been 25 years since the U.S. Congress passed the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996, an amendment to the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act, which mandated that the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) test all pesticide chemicals used in food for endocrine disruption. Soon after the law passed, EPA established the Endocrine Disruptor Screening and Testing Advisory Committee (EDSTAC) to provide recommendations to the agency on how its Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP) should work. Among them, the committee recommended that EDSP screening should 1) evaluate both human and ecological effects; 2) test for disruption of the estrogen, androgen, and thyroid systems; 3) evaluate pesticide and non-pesticide chemicals; and 4) implement a tiered approach. EPA adopted the recommendations and the EDSP was created in 1998. To date, the EPA has yet to fully implement the law; in other words, it has failed to test all pesticide chemicals for endocrine disruption. Of the small number that have been tested, not a single pesticide chemical has been determined to be an endocrine disruptor, and no regulatory actions have been taken. Here, we review the missed opportunities EPA had to make the EDSP a functional and effective program aimed at protecting human health and the environment. Two reports by the EPA's Office of Inspector General from 2011 to 2021 provide the framework for our discussion.

Keywords: Delaney clause; FIFRA; Food Quality Protection Act; cumulative effect; endocrine disrupting chemical; test guideline; validation; xenoestrogen.

Full text freely available here:

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articl...

[jimh111]

This is a major problem that is overlooked by nearly everyone except a few researchers in the field. Endocrinologists in general pay lip service to endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) but never accept they have a role in practice. The sole exception seems to be the USA 'Endocrine Society' endocrine.org/topics/edc .

My hypothyroidism was caused by endocrine disruption, I had severe hypothyroidism with normal blood test results. Potential EDCs are tested by giving large doses to rodents and measuring their TSH and T4. This works for most problem chemicals but the irony is that the small number of harmful substances that slip though the net will cause hypothyroidism with normal blood tests and endcrinologists will deny a diagnosis on the basis of the numbers.

The UN Environment Program and WHO produced a joint document unep.org/resources/publicat... that calls for the development of 'end point' testing, that is measuring the effects of the substances rather than just measuring hormone levels. The UN also has an introduction to EDCs unep.org/explore-topics/che... .

Although my case seems extreem and rare I suspect there will be many mild cases that might fall under the 'difficult to treat' category. These will be incredibly difficult to diagnose because these EDCs have little or no effect on blood hormone levels.

[helvella Administrator Thyroid UK in reply to jimh111]

I think another real problem is where the EDC affects us pre-birth.