You are here:
Recommended approaches to the scientific evaluation of ecotoxicological hazards and risks of endocrine‐active substances
Citation:
Matthiessen, P., G. Ankley, R. Biever, P. Bjerregaard, C. Borgert, K. Brugger, A. Blankinship, J. Chambers, K. Coady, L. Constantine, Z. Dang, N. Denslow, D. Dreier, S. Dungey, E. Gray, M. Gross, P. Guiney, M. Hecker, H. Holbech, T. Iguchi, S. Kadlec, N. Karouna-Renier, I. Katsiadaki, Y. Kawashima, W. Kloas, H. Krueger, A. Kumar, L. Lagadic, A. Leopold, S. Levine, G. Maack, S. Marty, J. Meador, E. Mihaich, J. Odum, L. Ortego, J. Parrott, D. Pickford, M. Roberts, C. Schaefers, T. Schwarz, K. Solomon, T. Verslycke, L. Weltje, J. Wheeler, M. Williams, J. Wolf, AND K. Yamazaki. Recommended approaches to the scientific evaluation of ecotoxicological hazards and risks of endocrine‐active substances. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management. Allen Press, Inc., Lawrence, KS, 13(2):267-279, (2017).
Impact/Purpose:
A SETAC Pellston Workshop ‘Environmental Hazard and Risk Assessment Approaches for Endocrine-Active Substances (EHRA)’ was held from 31st January to 5th February 2016 in Pensacola, Florida, USA. The primary aim of the workshop was to provide objective advice, based on current scientific understanding, to regulators and policy makers, whether in industry, government or academia. The aim is to make considered, informed decisions on whether to select an environmental hazard- or a risk-based approach for regulating a given endocrine-disrupting substance (EDS) under review. The workshop additionally considered recent developments in the identification of EDS. Case studies were undertaken on six endocrine active substances (EAS – not necessarily proven EDS), that are representative of a range of endocrine system perturbations and considered to be data-rich in relevant information at multiple biological levels of organisation for one or more ecologically-relevant taxa. The substances selected were 17α-ethinylestradiol, perchlorate, propiconazole, 17β-trenbolone, tributyltin and vinclozolin. The six case studies were not comprehensive safety evaluations, but provided the foundations for clarifying key issues and procedures that should be considered when assessing the environmental hazards and risks of EAS and EDS. The workshop also highlighted areas of scientific uncertainty, and made specific recommendations for research and methods-development to resolve some of the identified issues. The present paper provides a workshop summary and broad guidance for scientists in regulatory authorities, industry and academia on the issues likely to arise during the environmental hazard and risk assessment of EAS and EDS. Four cross-cutting issue papers also emanated from the workshop and are published as companions to this overview. The primary conclusion of this paper, and of the SETAC Pellston Workshop on which it is based, is that if data on environmental exposure, effects on sensitive taxa/life-stages, delayed effects and effects at low concentrations are sufficiently robust, initiating environmental risk assessment of EDS is scientifically sound and sufficiently reliable and protective of the environment.
Description:
A SETAC Pellston Workshop™ ?‘Environmental Hazard and Risk Assessment Approaches for Endocrine-Active Substances (EHRA)’ was held from 31st January to 5th February 2016 in Pensacola, Florida, USA. The primary aim of the workshop was to provide objective advice, based on current scientific understanding, to regulators and policy makers, whether in industry, government or academia. The aim being to make considered, informed decisions on whether to select an environmental hazard- or a risk-based approach for regulating a given endocrine-disrupting substance (EDS) under review. The workshop additionally considered recent developments in the identification of EDS. Case studies were undertaken on six endocrine active substances (EAS not necessarily proven EDS), that are representative of a range of endocrine system perturbations and considered to be data-rich in relevant information at multiple biological levels of organisation for one or more ecologically-relevant taxa. The substances selected were 17á-ethinylestradiol, perchlorate, propiconazole, 17â-trenbolone, tributyltin and vinclozolin. The six case studies were not comprehensive safety evaluations, but provided the foundations for clarifying key issues and procedures that should be considered when assessing the environmental hazards and risks of EAS and EDS. The workshop also highlighted areas of scientific uncertainty, and made specific recommendations for research and methods-development to resolve some of the identified issues. The present paper provides a workshop summary and broad guidance for scientists in regulatory authorities, industry and academia on the issues likely to arise during the environmental hazard and risk assessment of EAS and EDS. Four cross-cutting issue papers also emanated from the workshop and are published as companions to this overview.The primary conclusion of this paper, and of the SETAC Pellston Workshop™ on which it is based, is that if data on environmental exposure, effects on sensitive taxa/life-stages, delayed effects and effects at low concentrations are sufficiently robust, initiating environmental risk assessment of EDS is scientifically sound and sufficiently reliable and protective of the environment
