Environmental and human health impacts of growing genetically modified herbicide-tolerant sugar beet: a life-cycle assessment

There is ongoing debate concerning the possible environmental and human health impacts of growing genetically modified (GM) crops. Here, we report the results of a life-cycle assessment (LCA) comparing the environmental and human health impacts of conventional sugar beet growing regimes in the UK and Germany with those that might be expected if GM herbicide-tolerant (to glyphosate) sugar beet is commercialized. The results presented for a number of environmental and human health impact categories suggest that growing the GM herbicide-tolerant crop would be less harmful to the environment and human health than growing the conventional crop, largely due to lower emissions from herbicide manufacture, transport and field operations. Emissions contributing to negative environmental impacts, such as global warming, ozone depletion, ecotoxicity of water and acidification and nutrification of soil and water, were much lower for the herbicide-tolerant crop than for the conventional crop. Emissions contributing to summer smog, toxic particulate matter and carcinogenicity, which have negative human health impacts, were also substantially lower for the herbicide-tolerant crop. The environmental and human health impacts of growing GM crops need to be assessed on a case-by-case basis using a holistic approach. LCA is a valuable technique for helping to undertake such assessments.

An application of life-cycle assessment for environmental planning and management: the potential environmental and human health impacts of growing genetically-modified herbicide-tolerant sugar beet

Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) was used to assess the potential environmental and human health impacts of growing genetically-modified (GM), herbicide-tolerant sugar beet in the UK and Germany compared with conventional sugar beet varieties. The GM variety results in lower potential environmental impacts on global warming, airborne nutrification, ecotoxicity (of soil and water) and watercourse enrichment, and lower potential human health impacts in terms of production of toxic particulates, summer smog, carcinogens and ozone depletion. Although the overall contribution of GM sugar beet to reducing harmful emissions to the environment would be relatively small, the potential for GM crops to reduce pollution from agriculture, including diffuse water pollution, is highlighted.

Paraben esters: review of recent studies of endocrine toxicity, absorption, esterase and human exposure, and discussion of potential human health risks

This toxicology update reviews research over the past four years since publication in 2004 of the first measurement of intact esters of p-hydroxybenzoic acid (parabens) in human breast cancer tissues, and the suggestion that their presence in the human body might originate from topical application of bodycare cosmetics. The presence of intact paraben esters in human body tissues has now been confirmed by independent measurements in human urine, and the ability of parabens to penetrate human skin intact without breakdown by esterases and to be absorbed systemically has been demonstrated through studies not only in vitro but also in vivo using healthy human subjects. Using a wide variety of assay systems in vitro and in vivo, the oestrogen agonist properties of parabens together with their common metabolite (p-hydroxybenzoic acid) have been extensively documented, and, in addition, the parabens have now also been shown to possess androgen antagonist activity, to act as inhibitors of sulfotransferase enzymes and to possess genotoxic activity. With the continued use of parabens in the majority of bodycare cosmetics, there is a need to carry out detailed evaluation of the potential for parabens, together with other oestrogenic and genotoxic co-formulants of bodycare cosmetics, to increase female breast cancer incidence, to interfere with male reproductive functions and to influence development of malignant melanoma which has also recently been shown to be influenced by oestrogenic stimulation. Copyright (C) 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Endocrine disrupters and human health: Could oestrogenic chemicals in body care cosmetics adversely affect breast cancer incidence in women? A review of evidence and call for further research

In the decade that has elapsed since the suggestion that exposure of the foetal/developing male to environmental oestrogens could be the cause of subsequent reproductive and developmental effects in men, there has been little definitive research to provide conclusions to the hypothesis. Issues of exposure and low potency of environmental oestrogens may have reduced concerns. However, the hypothesis that chemicals applied in body care cosmetics (including moisturizers, creams, sprays or lotions applied to axilla or chest or breast areas) may be affecting breast cancer incidence in women presents a different case scenario, not least in the consideration of the exposure issues. The specific cosmetic type is not relevant but the chemical ingredients in the formulations and the application to the skin is important. The most common group of body care cosmetic formulation excipients, namely p-hydroxybenzoic acid esters or parabens, have been shown recently to be oestrogenic in vitro and in vivo and now have been detected in human breast tumour tissue, indicating absorption (route and causal associations have yet to be confirmed). The hypothesis for a link between oestrogenic ingredients in underarm and body care cosmetics and breast cancer is forwarded and reviewed here in terms of. data on exposure to body care cosmetics and parabens, including dermal absorption; paraben oestrogenicity; the role of oestrogen in breast cancer; detection of parabens in breast tumours; recent epidemiology studies of underarm cosmetics use and breast cancer; the toxicology database; the current regulatory status of parabens and regulatory toxicology data uncertainties. Notwithstanding the major public health issue of the causes of the rising incidence of breast cancer in women, this call for further research may provide the first evidence that environmental factors may be adversely affecting human health by endocrine disruption, because exposure to oestrogenic chemicals through application of body care products (unlike diffuse environmental chemical exposures) should be amenable to evaluation, quantification and control. The exposure issues are clear and the exposed population is large, and these factors should provide the necessary impetus to investigate this potential issue of public health. Copyright (C) 2004 John Wiley Sons, Ltd.