Exposure and risk assessment was performed by evaluating levels of volatile organic compounds (VOC) benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX) in 207 consumer products. The products were categorized into 30 different items, consisting of products of different brands. Samples were analyzed for BTEX by headspace-gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (headspace-GC/MS) with limit of detection (LOD) of 1 ppm. BTEX were detected in 59 consumer products from 18 item types. Benzene was detected in whiteout (ranging from not detected [ND] to 3170 ppm), glue (1486 ppm), oil-based ballpoint pens (47 ppm), and permanent (marking) pens (2 ppm). Toluene was detected in a leather cleaning product (6071 ppm), glue (5078 ppm), whiteout (1130 ppm), self-adhesive wallpaper (15-1012 ppm), shoe polish (806 ppm), permanent pen (609 ppm), wig adhesive (372 ppm), tapes (2-360 ppm), oil-based ballpoint pen (201 ppm), duplex wallpaper (12-52 ppm), shoes (27 ppm), and air freshener (13 ppm). High levels of ethylbenzene were detected in permanent pen (ND-345,065 ppm), shoe polish (ND-277,928 ppm), leather cleaner (42,223 ppm), whiteout (ND-2,770 ppm), and glue (ND-792 ppm). Xylene was detected in permanent pen (ND-285,132 ppm), shoe polish (ND-87,298 ppm), leather cleaner (12,266 ppm), glue (ND-3,124 ppm), and whiteout (ND-1,400 ppm). Exposure assessment showed that the exposure to ethylbenzene from permanent pens ranged from 0 to 3.11 mg/kg/d (men) and 0 to 3.75 mg/kg/d (women), while for xylene, the exposure ranges were 0-2.57 mg/kg/d and 0-3.1 mg/kg/d in men and women, respectively. The exposure of women to benzene from whiteout ranged from 0 to 0.00059 mg/kg/d. Hazard index (HI), defined as a ratio of exposure to reference dose (RfD), for ethylbenzene was 31.1 (3.11 mg/kg/d/0.1 mg/kg/d) and for xylene (2.57 mg/kg/d/0.2 mg/kg/d) was 12.85, exceeding 1 for both compounds. Cancer risk for benzene was calculated to be 3.2 × 10(-5) based on (0.00059 mg/kg/d × 0.055 mg/kg-d(-1), cancer potency factor), assuming that 100% of detected levels in some products such as permanent pens and whiteouts were exposed in a worst-case scenario. These data suggest that exposure to VOC via some consumer products exceeded the safe limits and needs to be reduced.

The heavy metal content of cosmetics may be a cause for concern in that exposure to these metals is associated with adverse consequences. Thus, the aim of this study was to assess consequences attributed to exposure to heavy metals in cosmetics as determined by non-cancer, cancer, and sensitization risks methodologies. The quantification and exposure assessments of aluminum (Al), chromium (Cr), manganese (Mn), iron (Fe), cobalt (Co), nickel (Ni), copper (Cu), zinc (Zn), arsenic (As), lead (Pb), mercury (Hg), cadmium (Cd), antimony (Sb), and titanium (Ti) were performed by inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry. The non-cancer risk assessment of Al, Cr, Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, Cd, Sb, and Ti in cosmetic samples resulted in a margin of safety (MOS) greater than 100 or a hazard index (HI) of less than 1. However, the probability of lifetime cancer risk (LCR) resulting from dermal exposure to heavy metals from cosmetics exceeded the acceptable risk levels (LCR > 10). An exposure-based sensitization quantitative risk assessment determined that the ratios of acceptable exposure level to consumers for Ni, Co, Cu, or Hg were above 1, suggesting an absence of skin-sensitizing potential. For an average daily user of lip cosmetics, the estimated intakes of heavy metals were within the acceptable daily intake (ADI). The percentage of heavy users for which metal intakes exceeded ADIs were 20.37% for Pb, 9.26% for Mn, 1.85% for Cr, and 1.85% for Cr, respectively. Data suggested that the heavy metals present in cosmetics do not appear to pose a serious risk to health. However, for heavy users of lip cosmetics, contamination with some heavy metals, such as Pb, Mn, and Cr needs to be minimized.

Lung, bladder, and kidney cancer mortality due to arsenic exposure have very long latencies, with increased risks manifesting 40 years after exposure reduction. Our findings suggest that arsenic in drinking water may involve one of the longest cancer latencies for a human carcinogen.

Inorganic arsenic is a toxic naturally occurring element in soil and water in many regions of the US including the Midwest. Prostate cancer is the second most common type of cancer in men in Iowa, surpassed only by non-melanotic skin cancer. Epidemiology studies have evaluated arsenic exposure from drinking water and prostate cancer, but most have focused on high-level exposures outside the US. As drinking water from groundwater sources is a major source of arsenic exposure, we conducted an ecologic study to evaluate prostate cancer and arsenic in drinking water from public water sources and private wells in Iowa, where exposure levels are low, but duration of exposure can be long. Arsenic data from public water systems were obtained from the Iowa Safe Drinking Water Information System for the years 1994–2003 and for private wells from two Iowa Well Water Studies, the Iowa Community Private Well Study (ICPWS, 2002–2003) and Iowa Statewide Rural Well Water Survey Phase 2 (SWIRL2, 2006–2008) that provided data for 87 Iowa counties. Prostate cancer incidence data from 2009 to 2013 for Iowa were obtained from Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results’ SEER*Stat software. County averages of water arsenic levels varied from 1.08 to 18.6 ppb, with three counties above the current 10 ppb limit. Based on the tertiles of arsenic levels, counties were divided into three groups: low (1.08–2.06 ppb), medium (2.07–2.98 ppb), and high (2.99–18.6 ppb). Spatial Poisson regression modeling was conducted to estimate the risk ratios (RR) of prostate cancer by tertiles of arsenic level at a county level, adjusted for demographic and risk factors. The RR of prostate cancer were 1.23 (95% CI, 1.16–1.30) and 1.28 (95% CI, 1.21–1.35) in the medium and high groups, respectively, compared to the low group after adjusting for risk factors. The RR increased to 1.36 (95% CI, 1.28–1.45) in the high group when analyses were restricted to aggressive prostate cancers (Gleason score ≥ 7). This study shows a significant dose-dependent association between low-level arsenic exposure and prostate cancer, and if this result is replicated in future individual-level studies, may suggest that 10 ppb is not protective for human health.

Acute nephrotoxicities of melamine (MEL), cyanuric acid (CA), and a mixture of both melamine and cyanuric acid (MC) were comparatively investigated in male Sprague-Dawley rats at 5 doses each with 10-fold dose interval as follows: MEL at 0.0315, 0.315, 3.15, 31.5, and 315 mg/kg; CA at 0.025, 0.25, 2.5, 25, and 250 mg/kg, and MC: [1×: (0.0315 + 0.025), 10×: (0.315 + 0.25), 100×: (3.15 + 2.5), 1000×: (31.5 + 25), and (315 + 250) mg/kg]. No marked adverse effects in renal function were observed in animals treated with MEL alone or CA alone, but evidence related to nephrotoxicity was noted in rats administered MC. Renal calculi and increased kidney weights were found in rats 7 d after daily oral administration of MC. Blood urea nitrogen (BUN) and creatinine were significantly elevated in the high dose MC groups at 100× or 1000×. In addition, elevated numbers of white blood cells (WBC), neutrophils, and lymphocytes in vivo and increased levels of prostaglandin E(2) (PGE(2)) in vitro were found in the MC group. Based on these data, the NOAEL (no-observed-adverse-effect level) for nephrotoxicity for MC was estimated to be 3.15 mg/kg body weight (bw)/d (MEL) plus 2.5 mg/kg bw/d (CA). If a safety factor of 1000 or more were applied to NOAEL, tolerable daily intake (TDI) would be 0.00315 and 0.0025 mg/kg/d or less for MEL and CA, respectively, which is far below the TDI of 0.2 mg/kg/d set by World Health Organization (WHO). In addition, in vitro cytotoxicity assays showed that the ACHN human renal adenocarcinoma cell line was more sensitive to MEL, CA, and MC than the MDCK canine kidney epithelial cell line. The 24-h half maximal inhibitory concentration (IC(50)) values for MEL (4792, 2792 μg/ml) were less than those of CA (9890, 6725 μg/ml, respectively) in MDCK and ACHN cell lines, suggesting that MEL may be more cytotoxic than CA. Furthermore, the 24-h IC(50) value for MC was found to be 208 μg/ml in ACHN cells. Data suggest that NOAELs based upon acute nephrotoxic parameters for MC were low, which might require further reassessment of the current TDI.