A study by ibs.GRANADA and the UGR warns of the greater impact of environmental pollution on women's health
Dr. Olea Serrano, former scientific director of ibs.GRANADA, professor at the Department of Radiology and Physical Medicine, talks about the problem of endocrine disruption, which highlights, among other things, the weakness of the protection system environment of human beings, the fragility of the mother-child binomial and the incoherence due to the constant forgetting of the condition of women in clinical research.
The UGR, as part of the Spanish Network of Health Promoting Universities (REUPS), promotes within the third edition of the initiative "A healthy message for a common goal" the campaign that this April analyzes the effect of pollution environment on our health
Nicolás Olea Serrano, professor in the Department of Radiology, has a degree and a Doctorate in Medicine and Surgery from the University of Granada. He is a university expert in Epidemiology, former scientific director of the Biosanitary Research Institute ibs.GRANADA. Director of the basic and clinical Oncology research group at ibs.GRANADA, his lines of research in Health and the Environment stand out: endocrine disruption, hormone-dependent cancer, environmental carcinogenesis, and radiological and nuclear diagnosis.
In 1992, the name “endocrine disruptors” was coined to define a heterogeneous group of chemical substances, taking advantage of the fact that the evidence of harm in animal species was very solid and the hormonal-based pathogenic hypothesis in the human species was beginning to be built. In 1996, the problem was recognized by the EU in Weybridge (UK) and, at the same time, in the first National Conference on Endocrine Disruptors held in Granada under the auspices of the University of Granada.
After thirty years of environmental and clinical research, human exposure to environmental chemical contaminants that interfere with the hormonal system is well known and better documented. In these years, much progress has been made in this field of knowledge, both in the census of endocrine disruptors and in the knowledge of the mechanisms of action, information on human exposure and epidemiological studies that describe the association between exposure to endocrine disruptors and diseases common.
With nearly 140.000 synthetic chemical compounds recognized by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), it is not surprising that no more than 1.500 have been identified as having the ability to disrupt hormonal balance. In some cases, these are compounds well known for their ability to accumulate and persist in food chains, as is the case of persistent organic pollutants (POPs), among which DDT and some PCBs stand out for their hormonal activity. Other times, however, they are contaminants that do not seem to accumulate in the body, being easily excreted, although with a prominent presence in the environment, water, food, cosmetics, air and consumer objects. In general, these endocrine disruptors were not designed as such and are part of more complex mixtures, that is, they are used as raw material for the manufacture of other substances, preparations or objects such as cosmetics (parabens, benzophenones), plastics (bisphenols, phthalates, perfluorinated), fabrics (polybrominated, organophosphates) and other materials (alkylphenols, tin derivatives, metals and metalloids), which greatly hinders the identification of sources of exposure and its prevention.
Changes in the health of different animal species (fish, reptiles, birds, mammals) that have been evidenced after exposure to this group of pollutants include: thyroid dysfunction, growth changes, increased incidence of problems related to the male reproductive tract, decreased fertility, loss of mating efficiency, behavioral abnormalities, metabolic alterations evident from birth, demasculinization, feminization and immune system alterations, and even increased incidence of different types of cancer .
In the human species, research into the effects of endocrine disruptors has turned out to be much more complex than expected and has revealed certain aspects of developmental biology that were previously unknown. These compounds, for example, are capable of intervening both in mammary morphogenesis and during the formation of the male and female genital apparatus, or in brain development, becoming real challenges for the neurodevelopment of the newborn. It is precisely during the period in which this critical development of an individual occurs that exposure to environmental hormones can determine the appearance of irreversible effects, generally not manifested until adulthood. Although subtle, these effects can lead to serious consequences for the individual later in life.
The work of Dr Olea's team focused on maternal and child exposure to endocrine disruptors has pointed out the fragility of the mother-child binomial with regard to the risk of transmission of exposure and the consequences of the hormonal problem in early stages of development. In particular, the most recent publications that indicate the presence of bisphenols, parabens, benzophenones, perfluorinated compounds and different specimens of metals such as arsenic, mercury, cadmium, lead in the milk of healthy mothers, have impacted public opinion and promoters of breastfeeding who defend it as the best way to feed the newborn.
The clinical and epidemiological evidence confirms this assertion, which does not rule out the need to act more diligently to prevent the exposure of the child through this natural route of feeding. If we are committed to this recommendation, we cannot demonize human breastfeeding, but we do feel obliged to denounce the situation of defenselessness that has been reached by allowing women to be exposed. Exposure protection systems have paid all their attention to men without taking into account that half of humanity is a woman, with a particular physiology, highly dependent on hormones and with the possibility of transferring their exposure through pregnancy and lactation. This secular neglect of the condition of women by a patriarchal and clearly sexist regulatory system, is now shameful in the face of the evidence of joint mother-son exposure, which nobody likes.
The problem of endocrine disruption has revealed, among other things, the weakness of the environmental protection system for human beings, the fragility of the mother-child relationship and the inconsistency due to the constant neglect of the condition of women in clinical research . It is unacceptable that we are surprised day after day with the way in which women are exposed to endocrine disruptors by carrying out, for example, an apparently harmless work activity, such as working in a highly plasticized intelligent building, with the use of cleaning products, with the professional use of cosmetics in hairdressing and manicures or, simply, when working as a cashier handling thermal paper rich in bisphenol-A, which until very recently has not been withdrawn from the market.
Non-occupational exposure to endocrine disruptors also poses a particular risk to women, which is why we believe it is time for any woman, whether or not she has planned to become a mother, to say enough is enough to a system that has repeatedly forgotten the vulnerability of her physiology in the face of exposures to endocrine disruptors and who is horrified to see that protection standards based on gender-biased research have failed to respond to their needs.