A common surfactant used in food packaging found to be toxic for reproduction in mammals

Nerín, Cristina; Canellas, Elena; Vera, Paula; García-Calvo, Estefanía; Luque-García, José L.; Cámara, Carmen; Ausejo, Raquel; Miguel, Joaquín; Mendoza, Noelia

doi:10.1016/j.fct.2018.01.044

Cited by 26 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Many of the chemicals that are intentionally used in the manufacture of food contact articles have not been tested for hazard properties at all, or the available toxicity data are limited [67]. Moreover, endocrine disruption, as a specific hazard of concern, is not routinely assessed for chemicals migrating from food contact articles, although some chemical migrants are known endocrine disruptors [73][74][75][76][77].…”

Section: Toxicity and Exposure Information Is Available Only For Few mentioning

confidence: 99%

Impacts of food contact chemicals on human health: a consensus statement

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Food packaging is of high societal value because it conserves and protects food, makes food transportable and conveys information to consumers. It is also relevant for marketing, which is of economic significance. Other types of food contact articles, such as storage containers, processing equipment and filling lines, are also important for food production and food supply. Food contact articles are made up of one or multiple different food contact materials and consist of food contact chemicals. However, food contact chemicals transfer from all types of food contact materials and articles into food and, consequently, are taken up by humans. Here we highlight topics of concern based on scientific findings showing that food contact materials and articles are a relevant exposure pathway for known hazardous substances as well as for a plethora of toxicologically uncharacterized chemicals, both intentionally and non-intentionally added. We describe areas of certainty, like the fact that chemicals migrate from food contact articles into food, and uncertainty, for example unidentified chemicals migrating into food. Current safety assessment of food contact chemicals is ineffective at protecting human health. In addition, society is striving for waste reduction with a focus on food packaging. As a result, solutions are being developed toward reuse, recycling or alternative (non-plastic) materials. However, the critical aspect of chemical safety is often ignored. Developing solutions for improving the safety of food contact chemicals and for tackling the circular economy must include current scientific knowledge. This cannot be done in isolation but must include all relevant experts and stakeholders. Therefore, we provide an overview of areas of concern and related activities that will improve the safety of food contact articles and support a circular economy. Our aim is to initiate a broader discussion involving scientists with relevant expertise but not currently working on food contact materials, and decision makers and influencers addressing single-use food packaging due to environmental concerns. Ultimately, we aim to support science-based decision making in the interest of improving public health. Notably, reducing exposure to hazardous food contact chemicals contributes to the prevention of associated chronic diseases in the human population.

show abstract

Section: Toxicity and Exposure Information Is Available Only For Few mentioning

confidence: 99%

Impacts of food contact chemicals on human health: a consensus statement

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The tested bags were new and unused. In each case, eight bags were filled with 30 ml of simulants (10% ethanol and water 2,3 ) and placed in a horizontal position so that the liquid was in contact with the entire surface of the bags. Three replicates were prepared.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of a panel of spermatological methods for assessing reprotoxic compounds in multilayer semen plastic bags

Schulze¹,

Schröter²,

Jung³

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The increase of fertility performance in sows is one of the biggest achievements in pig production over the last 30 years. Nevertheless, pig farms using artificial insemination (AI) repeatedly experienced in recent year’s fertility problems with dramatic consequences due to toxic compounds from plastic semen bags. In particular, bisphenol A diglycidyl-ether (BADGE) present in multilayer plastic bags can leach into the semen and could affect the functionality of the spermatozoa. Former studies could not find any alterations in spermatozoa based on the exposure to BADGE. The aim of the study was to evaluate effects of BADGE on boar spermatozoa using an extended panel of spermatological methods. In spring 2019, a large drop in farrowing rates from 92.6 ± 2.3% to 63.7 ± 11.1% in four sow farms in Croatia was detected. In migration studies, BADGE could be identified as a causal toxic compound and leached into the extended semen in concentration of 0.37 ± 0.05 mg/L. Detailed spermatological studies showed that significant predictors for effects on spermatozoa were different levels of motility and kinematic data after a prolonged storage time, thermo-resistance test (prolonged incubation time), mitochondrial activity, membrane integrity and fluidity. No serious effects were observed for sperm morphology and DNA fragmentation. These results provide new insights into the development of a new quality assurance concept for a detailed spermatological examination during testing of plastic materials for boar semen preservation. It could be shown that boar spermatozoa are an excellent biosensor to detect potential toxicity and fertility-relevant compounds.

show abstract

“…Non‐apoptotic‐like cells and mitochondrial inner membrane potential were assessed by a double‐stain technique with YoPro (1 mM in dimethyl sulphoxide [DMSO]; Invitrogen), a DNA dye used as an apoptotic marker because it permeates into cells that are beginning to undergo apoptosis, and MitoTracker (10 μM in DMSO) was used to evaluate mitochondrial membrane potential. These stainings were performed as previously described (Mendoza, Casao, Perez‐Pe, Cebrian‐Perez, & Muino‐Blanco, 2013; Nerin et al., 2018).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Insemination of sows with seminal doses prepared by a two‐step hypothermic dilution does not impair the reproductive performance at farm

Soler‐Llorens

Mendoza

Miguel

et al. 2020

Reprod Domestic Animals

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reproduction in swine is mostly carried out through artificial insemination (AI). For this purpose, AI studs collect the ejaculates, analyse the sperm quality, dilute and package to produce seminal doses and ship them to sow farms to carry out the AI. Temperature is controlled during the process to avoid sperm damage. Semen is diluted in the extender in a one‐step or a two‐step process where the second can be isothermic (approximately 32°C) or hypothermic (room temperature 21–22°C). Both techniques are currently performed, and the latter could reduce time and costs, but the literature available comparing the processes is scarce and presents discrepancies. To date, there are no studies about its impact in fertility. This study compared hypothermic two‐step dilution (HTSD) and isothermic two‐step dilution (ITSD) in laboratory and field trial to elucidate whether HTSD has any effect. Ejaculates from 72 boars in nine AI studs were split and processed with both techniques using a high‐performance extender and evaluated in laboratory. Four farms inseminated 345 sows with samples of four of these AI studs, and their fertility and prolificacy were registered. Results show no significant differences between doses prepared by HTSD and ITSD technique, having no impact in laboratory results (percentage of motile sperm, short hypoosmotic swelling test (sHOST) and short osmotic resistance test (sORT), viable sperm, damaged acrosomes, sperm under early apoptosis, high mitochondrial membrane potential (p > .1), fertility (92.2% versus 94.1%, p = .45) or farrowing rate (15.8 ± 0.3 versus 16.1 ± 0.3 p = .46). In conclusion, our results suggest that HTSD of semen on extender could be safely implemented in AI studs under the conditions tested.

show abstract

A common surfactant used in food packaging found to be toxic for reproduction in mammals

Cited by 26 publications

References 31 publications

Impacts of food contact chemicals on human health: a consensus statement

Impacts of food contact chemicals on human health: a consensus statement

Evaluation of a panel of spermatological methods for assessing reprotoxic compounds in multilayer semen plastic bags

Insemination of sows with seminal doses prepared by a two‐step hypothermic dilution does not impair the reproductive performance at farm

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About