Pure Appl. Chem., 2003, Vol. 75, No. 11-12, pp. 2563-2574
http://dx.doi.org/10.1351/pac200375112563
Government view of endocrine disruption in wildlife
Abstract:
Like hardly any other issue in ecotoxicology, endocrine
disruption has given rise to public concern. Reproductive, behavioral,
and immunological effects in wildlife were publicly not only understood
as possible threats to wildlife populations, but also as early warning
signals that human health could be at risk. Above all, the public has
been concerned about negative outcomes in reproductive health, and effects
like feminization in fish were regarded as evidence for the biological
plausibility of the hypothesis that environmental levels of hormonally
active chemicals are high enough to affect human reproductive health.
Public concern has been mirrored by several parliamentary and governmental
decisions emphasizing the need for extensive research and rapid measures
to reduce the risk associated with endocrine-disrupting substances.
Endocrine disruption in wildlife is clearly a priority issue. At least
in densely populated areas like Europe, symptoms of endocrine disruption
in wildlife cannot only be detected in areas with abnormally high levels
of pollution, but have also occurred in main river systems, estuaries,
and even in the open sea. Imposex in mollusks and feminization in fish
that were clearly related to disturbances in the hormonal system of
these organisms by exogenous substances have been used as markers in
monitoring programs. Though symptoms of endocrine disruption can be
clearly identified, it is much more difficult to link these outcomes
to causative chemicals or mixtures of substances. Natural and pharmaceutical
hormones, phytoestrogens, pesticides, and industrial chemicals may all
play a role to a different degree depending on the site under study.
This means that several different risk-reduction strategies have to
be applied, including bans of substances, use restrictions, and installation
and optimization of sewage treatment works embedded in a strategy for
the overall reduction of chemical input into the environment.
It should be noted that, in addition to national and international
regulatory actions taken by state authorities, a considerable reduction
of the environmental input could be achieved in several countries by
voluntary actions taken by industry.
Regulatory bodies are still facing major problems in the field of
risk assessment and risk reduction. Association between effects and
causative agents or mixtures are in many cases weak. Important tools
for risk assessment such as dose-response relationships or the existence
of thresholds are not yet agreed on. These uncertainties are the reason
that many national governments and the European Commission have identified
precaution as the main element in chemicals policy for the management
of endocrine disruptors.
This paper is based on documents of the German Federal Environmental
Agency, but solely represents the view of the author from a regulatory
perspective and emphasizes the wildlife aspects of endocrine disruption.