4.7 Article

Risk assessment of PFASs in drinking water using a probabilistic risk quotient methodology

Journal

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
Volume 712, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.136485

Keywords

PFASs; Drinking water; Occurrence; Human risk assessment; Legislation; Lognormal distribution

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We evaluated health risks associated with perfluorinated and polyfluorinated alkyl substances (PFASs) found in drinking water applying human risk assessment (HRA) methodology. Using data on worldwide occurrence of PFASs in drinking water and recent guidelines for PFASs in drinking water, we applied four scenarios based on different toxicological threshold values to calculate age-dependent risk quotients (RQ) for different PFASs. The mean concentrations of the most frequently detected compounds (PFOS and PFOA) were highest in North America (99.2 and 30.7 ng L-1 respectively), and lowest in Asia (PFOS: 3.0 ng L-1) and Europe (PFOA: 4.87 ng L-1). Using HRA methodology and maximum reported concentrations, only PFOS and PFOA, examined individually, showed any threat to human health. Specifically, calculations with the average and maximum concentrations of PFOS showed RQ values higher than 0.2 or 1, respectively, for some age groups under specific scenarios. Similarly, using maximum PFOA concentrations, a RQ equal to 0.2 for infants up to 3 months was calculated under scenario 4. Regional differences on RQ values were observed when PFOS concentrations from Europe, North America and Asia were used. Estimation of the human health risk due to mixtures of PFASs using average concentrations showed that the RQ(mix) was higher than 0.2 for infants up to 3 months (scenario 3) and infants and children up to 6 years old (scenario 4). More importantly, evaluation of the guideline values set by the EU and the Health Advisory Levels issued by the USEPA resulted (under some scenarios) in RQ values higher than 0.2 for PFOS and PFOA for specific age groups, indicating that further discussion is needed for the monitoring and prioritization of these compounds. (C) 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available