3.9 Review

Exposure to Environmental Endocrine Disruptors and Child Development

Journal

ARCHIVES OF PEDIATRICS & ADOLESCENT MEDICINE
Volume 166, Issue 10, Pages 952-958

Publisher

AMER MEDICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1001/archpediatrics.2012.241

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences [R01ES018872, P42ES017198, P20ES018171, P30ES017885]
  2. US Environmental Protection Agency [RD83480001]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Exposure to exogenous chemicals can affect endocrine function at multiple sites and through numerous specific modes of action, which may have far-reaching effects on human health and development. Widespread human exposure to known or suspected endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) has been documented in the United States and worldwide, as have trends for increased rates of endocrine-related diseases and disorders among children. While human epidemiology studies of exposure to EDCs and children's health remain extremely limited, a growing body of evidence shows that exposure to a number of chemicals commonly found in consumer goods, personal care products, food, drinking water, and other sources may adversely affect child development through altered endocrine function. This narrative review provides a brief introduction to several common EDCs (with a specific focus on persistent organic pollutants, phthalates, bisphenol A, and contemporary-use pesticides, which represent only a small number of all known or suspected EDCs), an overview of the state of the human evidence for adverse effects of EDCs on child development (fetal growth, early reproductive tract development, pubertal development, neurodevelopment, and obesity), guidance for health care providers based on current knowledge, and recommendations for future research. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2012;166(10):952-958. Published online June 4, 2012. doi:10.1001/archpediatrics.2012.241

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available