Download Report

ARTICLES EN ANGLAIS
(Cliquer sur les titres pour voir l’article correspondant)
New research raises more alarm about hormone-mimicking
chemicals
● Pghcitypaper.com
Les résultats d’une étude, présentés lors de l'assemblée annuelle de
l'Endocrine Society, montrent que l’exposition aux phtalates affecte les
niveaux d’hormone HCG, une hormone liée à la grossesse. Ces modifications
peuvent induire des effets néfastes sur le développement fœtal.
p2-3
EU Commission grants DEHP and DBP authorisations
● Chemicalwatch.com
● Chemicalwatch.com
La Commission européenne a délivré une autorisation permettant à la
société britannique Roxel d’utiliser les phtalates DEHP et DBP dans la
fabrication de propergols solides et de charges de moteur pour fusées et
missiles tactiques. L’utilisation industrielle de DBP a également été
autorisée dans une peinture spécialisée dans la fabrication de moteurs.
Denmark to propose DINP classification as 1B reprotoxicant
Le Danemark propose de classer le DINP comme substance reprotoxique de
catégorie 1B (avéré pour l’animal et suspecté pour l’homme).
p4
p5
Maine to designate formaldehyde, phthalates as priority chemicals
● Chemicalwatch.com
Le Ministère de la protection de l'environnement du Maine (USA) a proposé
de classer le formaldéhyde et quatre phtalates (DEHP, DBP, BBP et DEP)
comme substances prioritaires, dans le cadre de la loi sur les substances
toxiques dans les produits destinés aux enfants (Toxic Chemicals in
Children's Products law).
p6
1
http://www.pghcitypaper.com/pittsburgh/new-research-raises-more-alarm-about-hormone-mimickingchemicals/Content?oid=1814302
Retour au début
March 25, 2015
New research raises more alarm about hormonemimicking chemicals
"We're talking about something like lead and IQ."
By Bill O'Driscoll
Environmental poisons aren't at all like they used to be. Sure, tobacco smoke and asbestos still kill. But
a more insidious — and more pervasive — class of chemicals is increasingly getting scientists'
attention.
Endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) are substances that imitate natural hormones in the body. We
absorb them constantly, mostly through plastics and personal-care products. And a growing stack of
studies links these synthetic chemicals to everything from asthma to low IQ, cancer and altered
reproductive development.
One widely publicized EDC was bisphenol-A, found in places like the linings of food cans. Possibly
even more prevalent are a group of EDCs called phthalates. Though mostly used as binding agents and
softeners in plastics, phthalates ("thale-ates") are found in hundreds of products, from vinyl flooring
and raincoats to cosmetics, personal-care items and food.
In 2012, responding to research about risks to infants, Congress banned some phthalates in children's
toys and some child-care products. A 2014 Columbia University study tied prenatal phthalate exposure
to a more than six-point decrease in IQ. Now, research from the University of Pittsburgh Graduate
School of Public Health suggests further risks to pregnant women and their babies.
The study explores how phthalates affect hCG, a pregnancy hormone produced by the placenta that
affects fetal sex development. Data collected from more than 350 women (in states including
California) found that among women with high phthalate exposure, there was lower hCG in those
carrying male babies and higher hCG in those carrying female babies. Higher hCG, in turn, correlates
with a shorter anogenital distance — the distance from anus to scrotum — in male babies. And shorter
anogenital distance is strongly associated with low sperm count.
The findings were presented at the Endocrine Society's annual meeting, March 5 in San Diego, by Pitt
epidemiologist Jennifer Adibi. "Our study is the first to look at hCG as a target of phthalate exposure in
pregnancy," Abidi said. Because a mother's blood does not reach the fetus directly, the study suggests
how maternal exposure to EDCs might influence fetal development.
Though worrisome in itself, the Pitt study is only the tip of the EDC iceberg. Besides phthalates, other
EDCs include pesticides and flame retardants. In another study presented at the Endocrine Society
meeting, Canadian researchers examined exposures by rats to both phthalates and the flame retardants
on foam furniture cushions. (Flame retardants are also found in mattresses, children's pajamas,
electronics and car seats.) Researchers found that rat pups whose mothers received low doses of these
2
compounds exhibited increased behaviors like those seen in humans with autism-spectrum disorders:
less social interaction, for instance, and more hyperactivity.
Study of EDCs — a field that barely existed 20 years ago — produced about 750 research papers last
year, according to pioneering, New York-based researcher Shanna S. Swan, on whose work the recent
Pitt study expanded.
Some effects of EDCs might seem small: In the Pitt study, for instance, the average decline in
anogenital distance was 5 percent. But these changes add up. As Adibi says, "We're talking about
something like lead and IQ," where tiny toxic exposures, at levels once thought safe, proved disastrous
in large populations over time.
Prenatal EDC exposure has also been linked to problems like obesity, diabetes and attention-deficit
disorder. A recent paper in the The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism estimated that
EDC exposure costs the European Union 157 billion euros (about $209 billion) a year in medical
expenses and lost earning potential. (Most of that is from pesticides, and most impacts are neurological,
researchers said.) But that estimate accounts for only a fraction of the 1,000 or so likely EDCs. Most of
those substances are neither regulated nor rigorously tested for health effects (let alone for interactions
with other chemicals, including pharmaceuticals, in human bodies).
Many will ask how individuals can protect themselves. And indeed, scientists say checking product
labels and not microwaving plastic food containers are smart strategies for avoiding EDCs.
But Adibi says we have to address EDC exposures on a bigger scale — with consumer advocacy,
education of health-care providers and, yes, regulation: "The research is raising the red flag that the
only way to tackle these exposures is to address them as a society."
Retour au début
3
https://chemicalwatch.com/23191/eu-commission-grants-dehp-and-dbp-authorisations
Retour au début
EU Commission grants DEHP and DBP authorisations
18 March 2015 / Europe, Priority substances
The European Commission granted authorisations, yesterday, allowing UK company Roxel to use the
phthalates DEHP and DBP (CW 11 December 2014).
They were for:


the industrial use of DBP and DEHP in the manufacture of solid propellants and motor charges
for rockets and tactical missiles; and
the industrial use of DBP within a specialty paint in the manufacture of motors for the same.
The risks presented by the two phthalates are adequately controlled, the Commission said in its
decision. There are no suitable alternatives at the moment but the search is ongoing, it said.
The authorisation will be reviewed by 21 February 2019.
This is the third REACH authorisation decision made by the Commission. The previous two also
concern the use of DEHP or DBP:


UK company Rolls Royce can use DEHP in the manufacture of aircraft engine blades (CW 20
June 2014); and
the German-based joint venture Sasol-Huntsman is authorised to use DBP as an absorption
solvent in a closed system in the manufacture of maleic anhydride (CW 23 December 2014).
Retour au début
4
https://chemicalwatch.com/22946/denmark-to-propose-dinp-classification-as-1b-reprotoxicant
Retour au début
Denmark to propose DINP classification as 1B
reprotoxicant
Plasticisers industry reassure their downstream users about the substance safe use
24 February 2015 / Denmark
Suppliers of the phthalate plasticiser DINP have sought to reassure their customers that the substance
can ―continue to be safely used in all current applications‖ following Denmark’s decision to seek its
mandatory classification in Europe as a category 1B reprotoxicant. If it becomes law, the phthalate
would become eligible for inclusion in the candidate list.
DINP is one of six phthalates banned, by a REACH restriction, in toys and childcare articles placed on
the European market, but it is not classified under the CLP Regulation as a carcinogenic, mutagenic or
reprotoxicant (CMR). Within the phthalates family, the strongest evidence of adverse effects has been
linked to those of low molecular weight, such as DBP, BBP and DEHP, and the market for phthalates
in general has been moving away from these towards those of high molecular weight, such as DINP,
DIDP and DPHP. The European Council for Plasticisers and Intermediates (ECPI), says DINP has
become the major plasticiser in the EU and one of the alternatives to DEHP, and is a ―critical‖ raw
material for the EU PVC industry (CW 14 January 2014).
Following a review by Echa, the European Commission decided early last year that the restriction on
DINP in toys should remain, but that no other risk measures were necessary to handle adult and child
exposure to the two chemicals from other sources (CW 5 February 2014). Consequently, the ECPI says
it is surprised to see Denmark’s notification so soon after the ―in-depth‖ assessment.
Denmark's EPA says it is, of course, aware of Echa’s review, but it was ―a risk assessment-based
review and not a new evaluation in relation to the criteria for classification, and mostly referred to
previous classification evaluations‖. Echa’s task, it says, had been to look into whether new scientific
data would justify amending or lifting the restriction.
The Danish EPA also stresses that the review’s conclusion – that no further risks were identified and
that no further risk management measures were necessary – related to whether there was a need to
reduce exposure to DINP. In contrast, its proposal is based on the intrinsic properties of the substance
and whether the scientific data justifies a harmonised classification.
There are ten DINP manufacturers or importers in Europe, including ExxonMobil, Dow and BASF.
The lead registrant for the joint submission REACH registration dossier was Evonik.
Retour au début
5
http://chemicalwatch.com/22811/maine-to-designate-formaldehyde-phthalates-as-priority-chemicals
Retour au début
Maine to designate formaldehyde, phthalates as priority
chemicals
Reporting requirements for manufacturers of children's products
10 February 2015 / United States
The Maine Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) has proposed rules to designate
formaldehyde and four phthalates as priority products, under the Toxic Chemicals in Children's
Products law.
The proposed formaldehyde rule applies to children's products, covering bedding, childcare articles,
clothing, cosmetics, games, jewellery, school supplies and toys. Manufacturers of products containing
intentionally added formaldehyde should report information, such as the amount and the function of the
chemical, to the department.
The four phthalates proposed for the priority products list are:




di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP);
dibutyl phthalate (DBP);
benzyl butyl phthalate (BBP); and
diethyl phthalate (DEP).
The rule would apply to products containing the four intentionally added phthalates in children's
products, including arts and crafts supplies, building products and home maintenance articles,
cosmetics and personal care products, household and commercial cleaning materials and household
furniture and furnishings. It was proposed by citizen petition, last year (CW 14 July 2014). Since then,
the department has made significant changes to the draft, especially in the definitions of applicable
products, to make it ―more consistent with current effective rules, implemented by the Safer Chemicals
Program‖, says the DEP.
The deadline for comments on both proposed rules is 17 February.
Dinesh Kumar
Retour au début
6