From science to policy: How European HBM indicators help to answer policy questions related to phthalates and DINCH exposure

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Review › Forskning › fagfællebedømt

Dokumenter

  • Fulltext

    Forlagets udgivne version, 7,48 MB, PDF-dokument

  • Antje Gerofke
  • Madlen David
  • Phillipp Schmidt
  • Joana Lobo Vicente
  • Jurgen Buekers
  • Liese Gilles
  • Ann Colles
  • Jos Bessems
  • Michiel Bastiaensen
  • Adrian Covaci
  • Elly Den Hond
  • Gudrun Koppen
  • Michelle Laeremans
  • Veerle J. Verheyen
  • Milena Černá
  • Jana Klánová
  • Andrea Krsková
  • Martin Zvonař
  • Holger M. Koch
  • Tina Kold Jensen
  • Loïc Rambaud
  • Margaux Riou
  • Nina Vogel
  • Catherine Gabriel
  • Spyros Karakitsios
  • Nafsika Papaioannou
  • Denis Sarigiannis
  • Réka Kakucs
  • Szilvia Középesy
  • Péter Rudnai
  • Tamás Szigeti
  • Fabio Barbone
  • Valentina Rosolen
  • Cedric Guignard
  • Arno C. Gutleb
  • Amrit Kaur Sakhi
  • Line Småstuen Haug
  • Beata Janasik
  • Danuta Ligocka
  • Milada Estokova
  • Lucia Fabelova
  • Branislav Kolena
  • Lubica Palkovicova Murinova
  • Ida Petrovicova
  • Denisa Richterova
  • Milena Horvat
  • Darja Mazej
  • Janja Snoj Tratnik
  • Agneta Annika Runkel
  • Argelia Castaño
  • Marta Esteban-López
  • Susana Pedraza-Díaz
  • Agneta Åkesson
  • Sanna Lignell
  • Jelle Vlaanderen
  • Jan Paul Zock
  • Greet Schoeters
  • Marike Kolossa-Gehring
Within the European Human Biomonitoring (HBM) Initiative HBM4EU we derived HBM indicators that were designed to help answering key policy questions and support chemical policies. The result indicators convey information on chemicals exposure of different age groups, sexes, geographical regions and time points by comparing median exposure values. If differences are observed for one group or the other, policy measures or risk management options can be implemented. Impact indicators support health risk assessment by comparing exposure values with health-based guidance values, such as human biomonitoring guidance values (HBM-GVs). In general, the indicators should be designed to translate complex scientific information into short and clear messages and make it accessible to policy makers but also to a broader audience such as stakeholders (e.g. NGO's), other scientists and the general public. Based on harmonized data from the HBM4EU Aligned Studies (2014–2021), the usefulness of our indicators was demonstrated for the age group children (6–11 years), using two case examples: one phthalate (Diisobutyl phthalate: DiBP) and one non-phthalate substitute (Di-isononyl cyclohexane-1,2- dicarboxylate: DINCH). For the comparison of age groups, these were compared to data for teenagers (12–18 years), and time periods were compared using data from the DEMOCOPHES project (2011–2012). Our result indicators proved to be suitable for demonstrating the effectiveness of policy measures for DiBP and the need of continuous monitoring for DINCH. They showed similar exposure for boys and girls, indicating that there is no need for gender focused interventions and/or no indication of sex-specific exposure patterns. They created a basis for a targeted approach by highlighting relevant geographical differences in internal exposure. An adequate data basis is essential for revealing differences for all indicators. This was particularly evident in our studies on the indicators on age differences. The impact indicator revealed that health risks based on exposure to DiBP cannot be excluded. This is an indication or flag for risk managers and policy makers that exposure to DiBP still is a relevant health issue. HBM indicators derived within HBM4EU are a valuable and important complement to existing indicator lists in the context of environment and health. Their applicability, current shortcomings and solution strategies are outlined
OriginalsprogEngelsk
Artikelnummer114073
TidsskriftInternational Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health
Vol/bind247
Antal sider18
ISSN1438-4639
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 2023

Bibliografisk note

Funding Information:
The authors received funding from the EU Horizon 2020 framework (grant agreement No 733032 ). Additional financial support for the conduct of the studies is provided by each participating country.

Funding Information:
The FLEHS IV study was conducted within the framework of the Flemish Center of Expertise on Environment and Health (FLEHS 2016–2020) and funded by the Flemish Government, Department of Environment & Spatial Development .

Funding Information:
The „European Human Biomonitoring (HBM4EU) Initiative“ is a joint effort of 30 European countries, and the European Environment Agency (EEA), co-funded by the European Commission under the framework of Horizon 2020 aiming to improve and inform chemical safety. Using HBM methods the internal exposure of a chemical of interest is determined by measuring this substance in human samples such as urine, blood or hair. Since the internal exposure results from multiple sources, it represents the aggregated exposure from all routes (dermal, inhalation and oral). HBM has been identified as an important tool to support policy making (Ganzleben et al., 2017) but an improved science to policy transfer is urgently needed. Therefore, the focus of this publication is on how HBM indicators may answer policy-related questions and help identifying urgent needs for chemical regulation or management.The authors received funding from the EUHorizon 2020 framework (grant agreement No 733032). Additional financial support for the conduct of the studies is provided by each participating country.The Norwegian Institute of Public Health (NIPH) has contributed to funding of the Norwegian Environmental Biobank (NEB). The laboratory measurements have partly been funded by the Research Council of Norway through research projects (275903 and 268465).PCB cohort was supported by Ministry of Health of the Slovak Republic, grant no. 2012/47-SZU-11 and by Slovak Research and Development Agency, grant no. APVV-0571-12. PCB cohort follow-up received additional funding from the Ministry of Health of the Slovak Republic, program 07B0103.Riksmaten Adolescents was performed by the Swedish Food Agency with financial support from the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency and the Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency.The CELSPAC study is supported by the MEYS (LM2018121, CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/17_043/0009632 and CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/15_003/0000469) and from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement (857560). This publication reflects only the author's view and the European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.The FLEHS IV study was conducted within the framework of the Flemish Center of Expertise on Environment and Health (FLEHS 2016–2020) and funded by the Flemish Government, Department of Environment & Spatial Development.

Funding Information:
PCB cohort was supported by Ministry of Health of the Slovak Republic, grant no. 2012/47-SZU-11 and by Slovak Research and Development Agency , grant no. APVV-0571-12 . PCB cohort follow-up received additional funding from the Ministry of Health of the Slovak Republic, program 07B0103 .

Funding Information:
CROME study is co-funded by the European Commission research funds of Horizon 2020 and LIFE financial instrument of the European Community (LIFE12 ENV/GR/001040).

Funding Information:
The OCC studies were supported by Odense University Hospital, the Region of Southern Denmark, the Municipality of Odense, the Mental Health Service of the Region of Southern Denmark, Odense Patient data Exploratory Network (OPEN), Novo Nordisk Foundation [grant nr. NNF15OC00017734 and NNF19OC0058266], the Danish Council for Independent Research [4004-00352B_FSS].

Funding Information:
The Norwegian Institute of Public Health (NIPH) has contributed to funding of the Norwegian Environmental Biobank ( NEB ). The laboratory measurements have partly been funded by the Research Council of Norway through research projects ( 275903 and 268465 ).

Funding Information:
Riksmaten Adolescents was performed by the Swedish Food Agency with financial support from the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency and the Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency .

Funding Information:
POLAES study was co-financed by Ministry of Science and Education of Poland (contract no.3764/H2020/2017/2)

Funding Information:
The CELSPAC study is supported by the MEYS ( LM2018121 , CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/17_043/0009632 and CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/15_003/0000469 ) and from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement ( 857560 ). This publication reflects only the author's view and the European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.

Funding Information:
ESTEBAN is funded by Santé Publique France and the French ministries of Health and the Environment.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 The Authors

ID: 337595105