Urinary Pesticide Concentrations Among Children, Mothers and Fathers Living in Farm and Non-Farm Households in Iowa

Abstract

In the spring and summer of 2001, 47 fathers, 48 mothers and 117 children of Iowa farm and non-farm households were recruited to participate in a study investigating take-home pesticide exposure. On two occasions approximately 1 month apart, urine samples from each participant and dust samples from various rooms were collected from each household and were analyzed for atrazine, metolachlor, glyphosate and chlorpyrifos or their metabolites. The adjusted geometric mean (GM) level of the urine metabolite of atrazine was significantly higher in fathers, mothers and children from farm households compared with those from non-farm households (P < or = 0.0001). Urine metabolites of chlorpyrifos were significantly higher in farm fathers (P = 0.02) and marginally higher in farm mothers (P = 0.05) when compared with non-farm fathers and mothers, but metolachlor and glyphosate levels were similar between the two groups. GM levels of the urinary metabolites for chlorpyrifos, metolachlor and glyphosate were not significantly different between farm children and non-farm children. Farm children had significantly higher urinary atrazine and chlorpyrifos levels (P = 0.03 and P = 0.03 respectively) when these pesticides were applied by their fathers prior to sample collection than those of farm children where these pesticides were not recently applied. Urinary metabolite concentration was positively associated with pesticide dust concentration in the homes for all pesticides except atrazine in farm mothers; however, the associations were generally not significant. There were generally good correlations for urinary metabolite levels among members of the same family.

Re-registration Challenges of Glyphosate in the European Union

“…Critical gaps in the re-registration of glyphosate, including the EU re-registration process itself, have been addressed (European Parliament Council, 2002;Myers et al, 2016), particularly those considered more pressing by recent scientific findings. These include: (a) increasing exposures of EU citizens to glyphosate residues, supported by human and environmental biomonitoring data in limited number (Curwin et al, 2007;Mesnage et al, 2012;Krüger et al, 2014;Niemann et al, 2015;Connolly et al, 2017;Conrad et al, 2017;Mills et al, 2017;Vandenberg et al, 2017), but identifying a clearly rising trend; (b) carcinogenicity classification by IARC, evidence of linkages of glyphosate or its formulated products to non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (Hardell et al, 2002;De Roos et al, 2003Eriksson et al, 2008;Schinasi and Leon, 2014;Mesnage et al, 2015b), and effective dose levels indicated in rodent oncogenicity studies being 1-2 orders of magnitude lower when formulated glyphosate-based herbicides were used compared to those obtained with the pure active ingredient; (c) evidence of contributions to fatal chronic kidney disease by glyphosate in areas with heavy metals in water (Jayasumana et al, 2014(Jayasumana et al, , 2015 and the finding of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease upon exposure to a glyphosatebased herbicide (Roundup R ) (Mesnage et al, 2017b), coupled with the powerful animal metabolism data embedded within the re-registration document appendices (showing glyphosate and AMPA levels higher in kidney than in liver, and much higher than in muscle tissue); as well as (d) problems (e.g., risk assessment studies for regulatory purposes of re-registration of glyphosate being carried out with pure glyphosate) arising from the dual character of pesticide registration in the EU with active ingredients authorized at EU and formulated products at MS level (Klátyik et al, 2017a). In light of these findings, earlier risk assessment statements (Williams et al, 2000) are untenable for both hazard and exposure levels.…”

“…Biomonitoring of glyphosate residues in human urine have been carried out in the USA (Acquavella et al, 2003;Curwin et al, 2007;Mills et al, 2017), Europe Krüger et al, 2014;Connolly et al, 2017;Conrad et al, 2017) and Sri Lanka (Jayasumana et al, 2015), and indicated maximal concentrations of 0.45-233 ng/ml. Within these studies, one report compared glyphosate levels in the urine of humans and livestock, and found over one order of magnitude higher levels in the latter (Krüger et al, 2014).…”

Increased cancer burden among pesticide applicators and others due to pesticide exposure

“…3,[5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18] Pesticide applications to the home by a second party can result in both dermal and respiratory exposure. Other common routes of exposure to the general public include drinking water and dietary sources.…”

“…9 Another important source of pesticide (Table 4). 3,[5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18] Among adults applying liquid pesticides of low volatility, dermal exposures typically account for 90% of pesticide exposures. [14][15][16] The dermal penetration can vary between 2% and 20% if the pesticide is left on the skin for 8 hours or longer, 15 and therefore the use of proper protective equipment including chemical-resistant gloves and protective suits when handling the pesticide can substantially reduce exposure.…”

“…14,18 A larger fraction of the exposure would be by the respiratory route among those applying more volatile pesticides (eg, flying insect spray) and other aerosols, and thus respiratory protection appropriate to the chemical being used is usually recommended (Table 4). [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18] To minimize nonoccupational exposures to pesticides, EPA regulations have discouraged the use of the longerlasting and broad-spectrum pesticides. The lipophilic bioaccumulative organochlorine (OC) insecticides that were widely used in the mid-20th century were subsequently replaced by OPs, carbamates, and pyrethroids because these compounds were more environmentally labile and did not accumulate in the food chain to the same extent as the OCs.…”