Body burden

From

Summary

TBD.

Studies and Reports

• Entine J, Scare to Death: How Chemophobia Threatens Public Health, American Council on Science and Health, January 18, 2011.
• Paustenbach D and Galbraith D, Biomonitoring and biomarkers: exposure assessment will never be the same, Environ Health Perspect. 114(8):1143-9, August 2006.
  • Abstract. "Using modern analytical technology, it is now possible to measure almost any chemical present in our bodies. The future role of classical exposure assessment will perhaps be marginalized because biomonitoring programs can directly measure the concentration of chemicals that are present in biologic matrices. Although the concentration of chemicals in the environment will continue to be measured and related to exposure parameters, the prioritization of the national environmental agenda will be dictated by biomonitoring. Recent biomonitoring studies have examined the levels of >200 chemicals. Biomonitoring data, by themselves, are not informative in helping consumers understand their individual health risk. A major challenge facing those who conduct biomonitoring programs is how to best communicate the information to the public. In this article, we review benefits and challenges, along with select results from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's 2005 National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals. We recommend that these data be carefully interpreted, with the goal of establishing baseline exposure information, rather than creating surrogates for conclusions about human health risk."
• Paustenbach D and Galbraith D, Biomonitoring: is body burden relevant to public health?, Regul Toxicol Pharmacol.44(3):249-61, April 2006.
  • Abstract. "Biomonitoring is the study of the presence and concentration of chemicals in humans usually by the measurement of blood, urine or breath (exhaled air). Properly conducted, these data provide a picture of the amount of a chemical or agent actually absorbed into the body for a specific period of time. This review provides a history of biomonitoring, as well as the limitations and potential benefits of these studies. Examples of the proper and possibly improper use of biomonitoring and the impact made on our society are provided. Reasons for having comprehensive national biomonitoring programs are summarized, along with the societal benefits and risks. A brief discussion of the history of the NHANES program and select results from the 2005 Report are presented. By 2010, it has been predicted that the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) will be monitoring nearly 1000 chemicals in persons from all regions of the nation. The measurement of chemicals and biomarkers has revolutionized the field of exposure assessment. Overall, we recommend an approach of careful interpretation, understanding that the data obtained are useful for establishing baseline information about exposure, rather than equating detection with risk. We present suggestions for contextualizing biomonitoring results in order to provide the public with the tools to distinguish genuine health risks from trivial ones."

Additional Resources

• Buterworth T, Seattle Post Intelligencer Dumbs Down Science in Honor of Mom, STATS.org, May 10, 2007.
• Butterworth T, How Activist Groups Run The News, STATS.org, January 31, 2007.
• Butterworth T, Connecticut’s Biomonitoring Stunt, STATS.org, January 16, 2007.
• Scientists Denounce Scaremongering Activists,l Center for Consumer Freedom, September 20, 2005.
• Milloy S, Polluted People?, FoxNews.com, April 4, 2004.
• [Traces of Environmental Chemicals in the Human Body: Are They a Threat to Health?, American Council on Science and Health, May 2003.