4.5 Article

Non-occupational exposure to phthalates in Finland

Journal

TOXICOLOGY LETTERS
Volume 332, Issue -, Pages 107-117

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.toxlet.2020.06.021

Keywords

Phthalates; Environmental exposure; Non-occupational exposure; Biomonitoring; Urine; Biomonitoring equivalent

Categories

Funding

  1. Finnish Work Environment Fund [114078]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this study was to assess phthalate exposure of non-occupationally exposed working aged population in Finland. Studied phthalates included diethyl phthalate (DEP), di-n -butyl phthalate (DnBP), diisobutyl phthalate (DiBP), benzyl butyl phthalate (BzBP), dicyclohexyl phthalate (DCHP), di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP), diisononyl phthalate (DiNP), diisodecyl phthalate (DiDP), di(2-propylheptyl) phthalate (DPHP), and din-octyl phthalate (DnOP). Sample collection campaign took place in 2015. Metabolites of DEP, DnBP and DiBP were detected in all the first morning void urine samples of the non occupationally exposed volunteers (n = 60; 42 women and 18 men; aged 25-63). Metabolite of BBP and secondary metabolites of DEHP and DiNP were detected in > 90% of the samples. MCHP (1.7%), MEHP (18.3%), cx-MiNP (8.3%) and MnOP (1.7%) were less frequently detected. MiNP and OH-MPHP were not detected in any of the urine samples. The observed levels were mostly comparable to the levels published in the adult population in Europe and the US. One notable difference was the observed higher exposure of the Finnish study population to DnBP in comparison to the German, Austrian, Norwegian and US populations. The levels of individual phthalates did not often correlate very well with each other. In most cases, higher exposure to phthalates was seen in females in comparison to males, which is in accordance with other studies. The urinary levels were compared to the biomonitoring equivalents (BEs), which were calculated on the basis of published DNELs (derived no-effect levels). The P95 levels of individual phthalates remained below the respective BEs, the highest risk characterization ratio (RCR) being 0.88 for DnBP and the second highest 0.34 for DiBP. For other phthalates, the RCRs were below 0.2. Using the P95 levels, combined exposure to DnBP, DiBP, DEHP and BBP resulted in risk characterization ratio exceeding 1. This suggests a need to limit the exposure to these phthalates.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available