Thresholds of adversity for endocrine disrupting substances: a conceptual case study

Abstract

For endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDC) the existence of “safe exposure levels”, that is exposure levels that do not present an appreciable risk to human health is most controversially discussed, as is the existence of health-based reference values. Concerns have been especially raised that EDCs might not possess a threshold level such that no exposure level to EDCs can be considered safe. To explore whether or not threshold levels can be identified, we performed a screening exercise on 14 pesticidal and biocidal active substances previously identified as EDCs in the European Union. The respective substances are ideal subjects for case studies to review for endocrine activity and disruptive potential following well-defined regulatory assessment based on solid data to effectually establish adversity as consequence of endocrine disruption. Dimethomorph, metiram and propiconazole for which the weight of evidence demonstrating endocrine disruption was the strongest were used as subjects for further study. Epoxiconazole was additionally selected as its effects on the endocrine system are extensive. For all four substances, analysis of the toxicological data clearly indicated thresholds of adversity below which no adverse effects mediated through an endocrine mechanism were observed. Particular emphasis was placed on mechanistic considerations including homeostasis and the concept of adversity. As a proof of concept this study provides evidence that like other substances of toxicological concern EDCs have threshold levels for adversity. While for some EDCs the respective thresholds might indeed be very low this shows that, data allowing, for other EDCs sufficiently protective reference values can be derived.