Interest in the public health significance of trace levels of pharmaceuticals in potable water is increasing, particularly with regard to the effects of long-term, low-dose exposures. To assess health risks and establish target concentrations for water treatment, human health risk-based screening levels for 15 pharmaceutically active ingredients and four metabolites were compared to concentrations detected at 19 drinking water treatment plants across the United States. Compounds were selected based on rate of use, likelihood of occurrence, and potential for toxicity. Screening levels were established based on animal toxicity data and adverse effects at therapeutic doses, focusing largely on reproductive and developmental toxicity and carcinogenicity. Calculated drinking water equivalent levels (DWELs) ranged from 0.49 microg/L (risperidone) to 20,000 microg/L (naproxen). None of the 10 detected compounds exceeded their DWEL. Ratios of DWELs to maximum detected concentrations ranged from 110 (phenytoin) to 6,000,000 (sulfamethoxazole). Based on this evaluation, adverse health effects from targeted pharmaceuticals occurring in U.S. drinking water are not expected.

No abstract

Due to the presence of mercury at a number of major contaminated sites in the United States, the bioavailability of inorganic mercury in soil following ingestion has emerged as an important public health issue. Studies of the leachability/solubility of inorganic mercury in soil have shown that it is largely immobile, thereby suggesting that it will not be readily available for absorption in the gastrointestinal tract. Ignoring the effect of the soil matrix on decreasing bioavailability may result in a substantial overprediction of risks due to ingestion of contaminated soil. This paper discusses current knowledge about the oral bioavailability of inorganic mercury in soil and offers suggestions about how these data may be applied in human health risk assessment. Though precise estimates are not available, in vivo and in vitro estimates of the bioavailability of different inorganic mercury species in different matrices suggest that the bioavailability of mercury in soil is likely to be significantly less, on the order of at least three- to tenfold, than the bioavailability of mercuric chloride, the species used to derive the toxicity criteria for inorganic mercury. Because bioavailability can vary significantly with soil type, soil aging, the presence of co-contaminants and other factors, it is suggested that whenever the fiscal aspects justify a more precise estimate of bioavailability, site-specific estimates be developed. To develop a database for identifying a less expensive and more efficient method for estimating bioavailability, it is suggested that in vivo studies be conducted concurrently with in vitro studies. However, due to the lack of precision associated with the derivation of the most widely-used health guidance value for inorganic mercury (the USEPA RfD), additional work to address the uncertainties in the RfD is recommended.

No evidence of functional thyroid abnormality (eg., low thyroid hormone coupled with high TSH) was seen with exposure to the combined IUI agents and enhanced estimates of thyroid function.

The possible benefits of biological monitoring of large groups of people potentially exposed to environmental contaminants has become an area of much interest in recent years. Because chromite-ore processing residue has been found in some soils in northern New Jersey, urinary chromium monitoring of people in the community was evaluated as a potentially useful tool. In an attempt to identify those who could be exposed and to quantify the magnitude of exposure to the chromium in these soils, the New Jersey Department of Health (NJDOH) initiated a public health screening project. In 1992, the NJDOH proposed to evaluate over 4000 people who lived or worked near these sites. Volunteers were administered a questionnaire and were given a limited physical examination, and a single spot urine sample was collected. Because of the difficulties in using urinary chromium to assess low-level exposure and the potential implications of any regulatory decisions that could be based on the results of this project, a panel of experts was convened to evaluate the protocol. The panel consisted of five scientists and physicians with expertise in toxicology, dermatology, epidemiology, biological monitoring, and analytical chemistry. Like a World Health Organization group, the panel concluded that although urine biomonitoring can be useful in evaluating high levels of exposure to chromium, it is not reliable for assessing low-level exposure similar to that which may have occurred in northern New Jersey. The panel also noted that when urinary biomonitoring is to be used to assess the public's possible exposure, a large number of precautions must be taken to ensure the accuracy and usefulness of the results. The single most important recommendation was to collect a second, and perhaps a third, spot urine (or 24-h urine) sample before concluding that a person may be routinely overexposed. These suggestions are applicable to designing a biomonitoring program for nearly any environmental contaminant to which a community may be exposed. A review of scientific literature associated with biological monitoring of chromium is provided.