Daily-use products, including personal care products, household products, and dietary supplements, often contain ingredients that raise concerns regarding harmful chemical exposure. Endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) found in daily-use products are associated with numerous adverse health effects.

This pilot study explores the relationship between concentrations of EDCs in urine samples and products used 24 h prior to sample collection, and ingredients of concern in those products, in 140 adults of reproductive age in Northern Nevada.

Having higher numbers of products and ingredients of concern, especially in the personal care category, was associated with higher levels of mono-(-ethyl-5-carboxypentyl) phthalate (MECPP). Similarly, taking more supplements was associated with higher levels of methylparaben (MePB). In contrast, using household products with more ingredients of concern was associated with lower levels of monobutyl phthalate (MBP). Generally, women used more products, were exposed to more ingredients of concern and had higher urinary metabolites than men. Participants who rated themselves as being in poor/fair health were exposed to more personal care and supplement ingredients of concern than those in better health. Interestingly, those in excellent health also took supplements with more ingredients of concern.

Greater product use and more ingredients of concern are associated with urinary metabolites of known EDCs and self-ratings of poor health. Women and people who take supplements are at greater risk, and even people who consider themselves to be healthy can be highly exposed. More education among the general public is needed to make people aware of the presence of these chemicals in their everyday products so they can make efforts to avoid them.

The manufacture and production of industrial chemicals continues to increase, with hundreds of thousands of chemicals and chemical mixtures used worldwide, leading to widespread population exposures and resultant health impacts. Low-wealth communities and communities of color often bear disproportionate burdens of exposure and impact; all compounded by regulatory delays to the detriment of public health. Multiple authoritative bodies and scientific consensus groups have called for actions to prevent harmful exposures via improved policy approaches. We worked across multiple disciplines to develop consensus recommendations for health-protective, scientific approaches to reduce harmful chemical exposures, which can be applied to current US policies governing industrial chemicals and environmental pollutants. This consensus identifies five principles and scientific recommendations for improving how agencies like the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approach and conduct hazard and risk assessment and risk management analyses: (1) the financial burden of data generation for any given chemical on (or to be introduced to) the market should be on the chemical producers that benefit from their production and use; (2) lack of data does not equate to lack of hazard, exposure, or risk; (3) populations at greater risk, including those that are more susceptible or more highly exposed, must be better identified and protected to account for their real-world risks; (4) hazard and risk assessments should not assume existence of a "safe" or "no-risk" level of chemical exposure in the diverse general population; and (5) hazard and risk assessments must evaluate and account for financial conflicts of interest in the body of evidence. While many of these recommendations focus specifically on the EPA, they are general principles for environmental health that could be adopted by any agency or entity engaged in exposure, hazard, and risk assessment. We also detail recommendations for four priority areas in companion papers (exposure assessment methods, human variability assessment, methods for quantifying non-cancer health outcomes, and a framework for defining chemical classes). These recommendations constitute key steps for improved evidence-based environmental health decision-making and public health protection.

Exposures to industrial chemicals are widespread and can increase the risk of adverse health effects such as cancer, developmental disorders, respiratory effects, diabetes, and reproductive problems. The amended Toxic Substances Control Act (amended TSCA) requires the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to evaluate risks of chemicals in commerce, account for risk to potentially exposed and susceptible populations, and mitigate risks for chemicals determined to pose an unreasonable risk to human health and the environment. This analysis compares EPA's first 10 chemical risk evaluations under amended TSCA to best scientific practices for conducting risk assessments. We find EPA's risk evaluations underestimated human health risks of chemical exposures by excluding conditions of use and exposure pathways; not considering aggregate exposure and cumulative risk; not identifying all potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulations, and not quantifying differences in risk for susceptible groups; not addressing data gaps; and using flawed systematic review approaches to identify and evaluate the relevant evidence. We present specific recommendations for improving the implementation of amended TSCA using the best available science to ensure equitable, socially just safeguards to public health. Failing to remedy these shortcomings will result in continued systematic underestimation of risk for all chemicals evaluated under amended TSCA.

Every pregnant woman in the United States is exposed to many and varied environmental chemicals. Rapidly accumulating scientific evidence documents that widespread exposure to environmental chemicals at levels that are encountered in daily life can impact reproductive and developmental health adversely. Preconception and prenatal exposure to environmental chemicals are of particular importance because they may have a profound and lasting impact on health across the life course. Thus, prevention of developmental exposures to environmental chemicals would benefit greatly from the active participation of reproductive health professionals in clinical and policy arenas.

One's place of birth is a major determinant of his or her exposure to environmental toxicants. By understanding biological burdens of long half-life toxicants by race and nativity we can better understand geographic variation in toxicant distribution. We used the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (1999-2006) biomonitoring data to examine differences in blood and urine levels of long half-life environmental toxicants of foreign-born relative to US-born people by race/ethnicity. We log transformed blood and urine measures of 51 environmental toxicants. We then used "seemingly unrelated regression," a robust technique for making multiple comparisons across a group of variables with correlated error terms, to examine differences in blood and urine toxicants by nativity and race. We found that, compared to native-born Americans, the foreign-born are generally more likely to be exposed to metals (p<0.001) and organochlorine pesticides (p<0.001), but less likely to be exposed to dioxin-like compounds (p<0.001) or polyflourinated compounds (p<0.001). While levels of toxicants varied greatly by region of birth, US-born participants had consistently higher levels of dioxin-like compounds and polyflourinated compounds.