By Delthia Ricks
Scientists are suggesting a common cause for two seemingly unrelated events, the feminization of fish in Jamaica Bay, where the former 50-50 male-to-female ratio has all but disappeared, and enlarged breasts in young boys.
The common factor: endocrine disruptors, chemicals found in detergents, cosmetics and other products of daily living that increasing numbers of scientists now believe play havoc with normal hormone activity.
The chemicals’ residues find their way into Jamaica Bay where the fish live and are contained in the hair gels and shampoos used by the three boys featured in a study this year. After the study, the National Institutes of Health took the extraordinary step of advising doctors to ask patients what kinds of personal-care products they use at home.
In the case of Jamaica Bay, the specific endocrine disruptors implicated are NPEs — chemicals found in waterways worldwide that are used in some laundry detergents and industrial cleaning agents.
“What we found is quite disturbing,” said Anne McElroy, a marine scientist at Stony Brook University, referring to the gender change in Jamaica Bay’s flounder. “I don’t like to be an alarmist, but we have enough data from multiple years showing this effect and the fact that we’ve been able to re-create it in the lab makes the data pretty solid.”
Researchers who reported about the boys who used the hair gel and shampoo products — made from lavender and tea-tree oil — say the growth stopped after they stopped using the estrogenic cosmetics. With NPEs, scientists are still trying to decipher the extent of the problem.
The work at Jamaica Bay has drawn attention in part because it echoes findings in a landmark study published five years ago by the U.S. Geological Survey. It found remnants of painkillers, insect repellents, perfumes, contraceptives and caffeine all afloat in major waterways. At least one Long Island water official says there have been no signs of NPEs in the region’s drinking water. But as scientists sort out what it all means, the gender changes in marine life, and the concern about human harm, already have prompted the European Union to ban NPEs.
The local appeal of the Jamaica Bay studies also stems from research conducted on Cape Cod. There, scientists found that the chemicals were not broken down by septic systems before they were released into the ground. Like Cape Cod, Long Island relies heavily on septic systems to handle household waste.
The laundry detergent additive belongs to a family of “surfactants,” chemicals that lift dirt and help detergents and cleaning agents do a better job of stain removal. NPEs flow into Jamaica Bay from treated sewage that spreads over surface waters, experts say.
Makers of domestic and industrial cleaners say NPEs are virtually unbeatable in the way they remove dirt.
Manufacturer says its safe
At Huntsman Corp., a chemical giant in Salt Lake City, executives say the compound is safe and poses no harm to humans. The company is one of three major manufacturers of NPEs worldwide. Other key producers include Dow Chemical and Rhodia, a French company with U.S. offices in New Jersey.
“We manufacture the product and we will continue to manufacture the product,” said Huntsman senior vice president Russ Stolle. “We do not see it declining in terms of our interest. We believe it to be safe. We’ve not seen anything that we believe is valid and definitive that would suggest otherwise.”
Huntsman produces about 90 million pounds of NPEs annually, Stolle said. The company markets to manufacturers of industrial cleaners — those used by janitorial services.
James Kapin, a member of the American Chemical Society’s executive committee on health and safety, was circumspect when asked whether NPEs are safe. “That’s a very complicated question. There’s no simple or absolute answer. The dose makes the poison,” he said, citing sex changes in frogs, another species affected by the presence of the compounds worldwide.
But support for NPE-containing products is eroding. Wal-Mart Corp., for example, is discouraging the use of NPEs in cleaning agents it sells and has asked suppliers to find alternatives. Many major detergent manufacturers no longer use them.
Stony Brook’s McElroy said eating fish from waters tainted with NPEs probably would not pose harm. NPEs do not concentrate in the parts of the fish that make up a fillet, and researchers have shown the chemicals do not pose harm in laundry washed with detergents containing NPEs.
But health activists are not satisfied. Jeanne Rizzo, a registered nurse and executive director of the Breast Cancer Fund, an advocacy group that supports research on environmental links to the disease, wants federal regulators to identify and ban questionable ingredients in household cleaning agents, cosmetics and personal care products.
Her organization is concerned about a range of products — from plasticizers used in baby bottles, teethers and toys for infants to preservatives added to shampoos, soaps and hand lotions. She said the average American is exposed to at least six endocrine disruptors before leaving home daily for work or school.
In humans, researchers have only tentative links, but they suggest endocrine disruptors may be associated with an elevated risk of testicular, breast and ovarian cancers. They also suggest exposure may explain puberty occurring at younger ages in girls and the underdevelopment of genitals in some boys.
Doctors advised to be alert
The three cases of enlarged breasts in young boys prompted the National Institutes of Health to advise doctors to suspect the use of cosmetics that act as endocrine disruptors. Any of the compounds tend to mimic the female hormone estrogen, which explains why the boys developed enlarged breasts. The phenomenon was first identified by Dr. Clifford Bloch of the University of Colorado.
The National Cancer Institute has awarded Yale University a $5.5-million grant to study a nationwide spike in testicular cancers. Exploring a link to endocrine disruptors will be a major emphasis of the research.
NPEs are capturing scientific attention because the chemicals are so pervasive in waterways around the globe.
Just as NPEs were not broken down in sewer system discharges in Jamaica Bay, a recent study of septic tank systems on Cape Cod found NPEs defied degradation by septic systems. The study also found the compounds were seeping into groundwater, said Christopher Swartz, the scientist who led the research.
The study was conducted for the Silent Spring Institute, a nonprofit health advocacy organization that focuses on potential environmental links to breast cancer. Cape Cod, like Long Island, has a disproportionately high rate of the cancer. Although Long Island studies of potential environmental triggers of breast cancer have not produced a cause-and-effect, scientists have not abandoned their search.
In addition to breast cancer, Swartz said his studies of NPEs raise numerous other health-related questions. “If a pregnant woman consumed the water,” he said of drinking water drawn from a contaminated well, “would this impact her or the fetus?
“About 25 percent of residents in the United States use septic systems so it’s important to know what these systems remove and do not remove.”
The percentages Swartz cites are dramatically different in Suffolk, where up to 70 percent of households have septic tanks or cesspools as their primary method of water-waste removal. In Nassau, which is mostly sewered, the figure is about 20 percent.
Water districts on Long Island continually monitor for the presence of NPEs and other endocrine disruptors in drinking water, which is drawn from pristine wells deep below the groundwater table. An official at the Suffolk County Water Authority says there have been no signs of NPEs in the region’s drinking water.
“Our groundwater has a big layer of sand between the surface and the water table,” said Karen Randazzo, director of water quality and laboratory services at the authority. “It filters out many, many things. So chemicals that might run off the surface really don’t make it down to the aquifer.”
Call for discussion
Toxicologist Dr. Gary Ginsburg, author of the 2006 book “What’s Toxic, What’s Not,” said scientists and legislators should begin a policy discussion about endocrine disruptors because the number of products that contain them are increasing. Moreover, the public is confused about what they are and what dangers they pose, he said.
“We really need to expand research as we open the discussion,” Ginsburg said.
Susan Teitelbaum, an epidemiologist at Mount Sinai School of Medicine in Manhattan, said there is no conclusive evidence that environmental exposure to suspected endocrine disruptors leads to adverse human health effects.
“At the moment, I don’t think there’s enough evidence to suggest a cause and effect,” she said.
Bruce Brownawell, a Stony Brook University scientist who specializes in water quality, thinks NPE’s deleterious effects on fish do not portend a corresponding danger for humans. The changes in fish are more important, however, as a resonant signal of environmental health.
“Fish are exquisitely sensitive to natural and synthetic steroid estrogens,” he said, adding that “when these endocrine disruptors are in sewage-rich streams you will see feminization of fish.”
Still, activists cite the potential for further contamination, given the sheer volume of NPEs used in manufacturing. Chemical industry estimates show that usage has increased 2 percent a year since 1980, according to a 2005 report by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Some U.S. manufacturers have switched to other surfactants to avoid the environmental problems associated with NPEs. The popular detergent Tide is NPE-free. The additive has been eliminated from Simple Green All-Purpose Cleaner sold through Wal-Mart Stores and Sam’s Club outlets. But the makers of the product have not yet removed the compound from Simple Green cleaner sold elsewhere, citing the expense involved in switching to safer surfactants.
Jonathan Propper, president of Cot’n Wash in Philadelphia, makers of a laundry detergent called Dropps, said his company removed NPEs from its product in the last quarter of 2006 because of environmental concerns. He said the additive’s low cost is key to its popularity among manufacturers.
“They’re the workhorse for many, many household cleaning products,” Propper said. “They’re an inexpensive surfactant that are part of many household cleaning products, not just laundry products. They do degrade but they degrade slower and create [environmental] issues.”
Meanwhile, McElroy continues to see changes in local fish populations, and not just in flounder. Her new work shows changes in Atlantic silversides, which are found on the North and South shores of Long Island. “We’re also seeing skewed sex ratios there,” McElroy said. “That suggests that this is a wider phenomenon and not specific to Jamaica Bay.”
The ABCs of NPEs
What it is: NPE is the abbreviation for the family of compounds known as nonylphenol ethoxylates.
What they are used for: Used as a surfactant — dirt-lifters — to help detergents and other cleaning agents perform better cleaning jobs. Many major manufacturers have shied away from the compounds in search of more environmentally friendly additives. But the chemicals are still found in some domestic cleaning agents and those used by janitorial services.
What is wrong: The chemicals are strongly suspected endocrine disrupters that have caused male fish to switch genders.
Copyright 2007 Newsday Inc.
Comments