Advertisement

Environmental Risk Assessment of Personal Care Products

  • Babu Rajendran RamaswamyEmail author
Chapter
Part of the The Handbook of Environmental Chemistry book series (HEC, volume 36)

Abstract

Extensive usage and continuous release of personal care products (PCPs) lead to ubiquitous contamination of aquatic environment. As PCPs are mainly intended for external use on the human body, they are not subjected to metabolic alterations; therefore, large quantities enter the environment as such. Being biologically active and persistent, they are expected to pose a wide range of risks to aquatic habitat. Although studies on environmental concentration and toxicity endpoints are available for many PCPs, environmental risk assessment (ERA) was scantily reported. It was observed that most of the ERAs were based on hazard/risk quotient approach and not following three-tier approach due to lack of sufficient toxicological data (i.e., long-term toxicity at environmentally relevant (ppt–ppb) concentrations). From the ERA reports, it was understood that disinfectants, triclosan and triclocarban, cause high risk to aquatic organisms. In case of preservatives (parabens), the risk was low. Some fragrances (synthetic musks) and UV filters were also shown to be toxic in the aquatic habitat; however, majority of them are categorized as less risky. Other than the risk to macro forms, the antibacterial PCPs are likely to affect the community structure of nontarget (nonpathogenic) bacteria and may aid in developing (multidrug) resistance among pathogenic and nonpathogenic species. Therefore, for better risk assessment, environmentally relevant studies on nontarget organisms are to be given due importance, and it may include interactions of chemical mixture, degradation products, and bioavailability criterion as well.

Keywords

Antimicrobials Bacterial resistance Environmental risk assessment Hazard quotient Personal care products 

References

  1. 1.
    GIA (2012) Global personal care products market to reach $333bn by 2015 says GIA. In: cosmeticsdesign-asia.com. http://www.cosmeticsdesign-asia.com/Market-Trends/Global-personal-care-products-market-to-reach-333bn-by-2015-says-GIA. Accessed 14 June 2014
  2. 2.
    Bedoux G, Roig B, Thomas O, Dupont V, Le Bot B (2012) Occurrence and toxicity of antimicrobial triclosan and by-products in the environment. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 19:1044–1065CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Daughton CG, Ternes TA (1999) Pharmaceuticals and personal care products in the environment: agents of subtle change? Environ Health Perspect 107:907–938CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hernando MD, Mezcua M, Fernandez-Alba AR, Barcelo D, Fern AR, Barcelo D (2006) Environmental risk assessment of pharmaceutical residues in wastewater effluents, surface waters and sediments. Talanta 69:334–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brausch JM, Rand GM (2011) A review of personal care products in the aquatic environment: environmental concentrations and toxicity. Chemosphere 82:1518–1532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ramaswamy BR, Shanmugam G, Velu G, Rengarajan B, Larsson DGJ (2011) GC–MS analysis and ecotoxicological risk assessment of triclosan, carbamazepine and parabens in Indian rivers. J Hazard Mater 186:1586–1593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Blair BD, Crago JP, Hedman CJ, Klaper RD (2013) Pharmaceuticals and personal care products found in the Great Lakes above concentrations of environmental concern. Chemosphere 93:2116–2123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Marathe NP, Regina VR, Walujkar SA, Charan SS, Moore ERB, Larsson DGJ, Shouche YS (2013) A treatment plant receiving waste water from multiple bulk drug manufacturers is a reservoir for highly multi-drug resistant integron-bearing bacteria. PLoS One 8:e77310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Young TA, Heidler J, Matos-Perez CR, Sapkota A, Toler T, Gibson KE, Schwab KJ, Halden RU (2008) Ab initio and in situ comparison of caffeine, triclosan, and triclocarban as indicators of sewage-derived microbes in surface waters. Environ Sci Tech 42:3335–3340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zhang XX, Zhang T, Fang HHP (2009) Antibiotic resistance genes in water environment. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 82:397–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Selvaraj KK, Sivakumar S, Sampath S, Shanmugam G, Sundaresan U, Ramaswamy BR (2013) Paraben resistance in bacteria from sewage treatment plant effluents in India. Water Sci Technol 68:2067–2073CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mao D, Luo Y, Mathieu J, Wang Q, Feng L, Mu Q, Feng C, Alvarez PJJ (2014) Persistence of extracellular DNA in river sediment facilitates antibiotic resistance gene propagation. Environ Sci Tech 48:71–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ginebreda A, Kuzmanovic M, Guasch H, de Alda ML, Lopez-Doval JC, Munoz I, Ricart M, Romaní AM, Sabater S, Barcelo D (2014) Assessment of multi-chemical pollution in aquatic ecosystems using toxic units: compound prioritization, mixture characterization and relationships with biological descriptors. Sci Total Environ 468–469:715–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hirsch (2013) Pharmaceuticals and personal care products. http://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/health/case_studies/pharmaceutical.html. Accessed 15 June 2014
  15. 15.
    Capdevielle M, Egmond ARV, Whelan M, Versteeg D, Hofmann-kamensky M, Inauen J, Cunningham V, Woltering D (2008) Consideration of exposure and species sensitivity of triclosan in the freshwater environment. Integr Environ Assess Manag 4:15–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    European Commission (2003) European union risk assessment report, Trichlorobenzene. http://echa.europa.eu/documents/%2010162/44180838-c246-4d42-9732-45e2af411e52. Accessed 15 June 2014
  17. 17.
    USEPA (1998) Guidelines for ecological risk assessment. http://www.epa.gov/raf/publications/pdfs/ECOTXTBX.PDF. Accessed 15 June 2014
  18. 18.
    Shanmugam G, Sampath S, Selvaraj KK, Larsson DGJ, Ramaswamy BR (2014) Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in Indian rivers. Environ Sci Pollut Res 21:921–931CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Aronson D, Weeks J, Meylan B, Guiney PD, Howard PH (2012) Environmental release, environmental concentrations, and ecological risk of N, N-Diethyl-m-toluamide (DEET). Integr Environ Assess Manag 8:135–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mutiyar PK, Mittal AK (2013) Occurrences and fate of an antibiotic amoxicillin in extended aeration-based sewage treatment plant in Delhi, India: a case study of emerging pollutant. Desalin Water Treat 51:6158–6164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kummerer K (2001) Pharmaceuticals in the environment. Springer, Berlin/HeidelbergCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lyndall J, Fuchsman P, Bock M, Barber T, Lauren D, Leigh K, Perruchon E, Capdevielle M (2010) Probabilistic risk evaluation for triclosan in surface water, sediments, and aquatic biota tissues. Integr Environ Assess Manag 6:419–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Versteeg DJ, Belanger SE, Carr GJ (1999) Understanding single-species and model ecosystem sensitivity: data-based comparison. Environ Toxicol Chem 18:1329–1346Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Jjemba PK (2006) Excretion and ecotoxicity of pharmaceutical and personal care products in the environment. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 63:113–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Cunningham VL (2001) Environmental exposure modeling: application of PhATE™ and GREAT-ER to human pharmaceuticals in the environment. In: Kummerer K (ed) Pharmaceuticals in the environment, 3rd edn. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 133–146Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    García ODS, Pinto GP, García-Encina PA, Mata RI (2013) Ranking of concern, based on environmental indexes, for pharmaceutical and personal care products: an application to the Spanish case. J Environ Manage 129:384–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tamura I, Kagota K, Yasuda Y, Yoneda S, Morita J, Nakada N, Kameda Y, Kimura K, Tatarazako N, Yamamoto H (2012) Ecotoxicity and screening level ecotoxicological risk assessment of five antimicrobial agents: triclosan, triclocarban, resorcinol, phenoxyethanol and p-thymol. J Appl Toxicol 33:1222–1229Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zhao J-L, Ying G-G, Liu Y-S, Chen F, Yang J-F, Wang L (2010) Occurrence and risks of triclosan and triclocarban in the Pearl River system, South China: from source to the receiving environment. J Hazard Mater 179:215–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kosma CI, Lambropoulou DA, Albanis TA (2014) Investigation of PPCPs in wastewater treatment plants in Greece: occurrence, removal and environmental risk assessment. Sci Total Environ 466–467:421–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Dobbins LL, Usenko S, Brain RA, Brooks BW (2009) Probabilistic ecological hazard assessment of parabens using Daphnia magna and Pimephales promelas. Environ Toxicol Chem 28:2744–2753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Yamamoto H, Tamura I, Hirata Y, Kato J, Kagota K, Katsuki S, Yamamoto A, Kagami Y, Tatarazako N (2011) Aquatic toxicity and ecological risk assessment of seven parabens: individual and additive approach. Sci Total Environ 410–411:102–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lee I-S, Kim U-J, Oh J-E, Choi M, Hwang D-W (2014) Comprehensive monitoring of synthetic musk compounds from freshwater to coastal environments in Korea: with consideration of ecological concerns and bioaccumulation. Sci Total Environ 470–471:1502–1508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Balk F, Ford RA (1999) Environmental risk assessment for the polycyclic musks, AHTN and HHCB. II. Effect assessment and risk characterisation. Toxicol Lett 111:81–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Tsui MMP, Leung HW, Lam PKS, Murphy MB (2014) Seasonal occurrence, removal efficiencies and preliminary risk assessment of multiple classes of organic UV filters in wastewater treatment plants. Water Res 53:58–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Fent K, Kunz PY, Gomez E (2008) UV filters in the aquatic environment induce hormonal effects and affect fertility and reproduction in fish. CHIMIA Int J Chem 62:368–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Fent K, Kunz PY, Zenker A, Rapp M (2010) A tentative environmental risk assessment of the UV-filters 3-(4-methylbenzylidene-camphor), 2-ethyl-hexyl-4-trimethoxycinnamate, benzophenone-3, benzophenone-4 and 3-benzylidene camphor. Mar Environ Res 69(Suppl):S4–S6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Paredes E, Perez S, Rodil R, Quintana JB, Beiras R (2014) Ecotoxicological evaluation of four UV filters using marine organisms from different trophic levels Isochrysis galbana, Mytilus galloprovincialis, Paracentrotus lividus, and Siriella armata. Chemosphere 104:44–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Nohynek GJ, Antignac E, Re T, Toutain H (2010) Safety assessment of personal care products/cosmetics and their ingredients. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 243:239–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Dvorak G (2005) Disinfection 101. In: center for food security and public health 2160 veterinary medicine. http://www.coastalwaters2001.ecu.edu/cs-dhs/agromedicine/upload/Disinfection101Feb2005.pdf. Accessed 16 June 2014
  40. 40.
    Shanmugam G, Ramasamy K, Selvaraj KK, Sampath S, Ramaswamy BR (2014b) Triclosan in fresh water fish Gibelion catla from the Kaveri river, India and its consumption risk assessment. Environ Forensics 15:207–212Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Price OR, Williams RJ, Egmond RV, Wilkinson MJ, Whelan MJ (2010) Predicting accurate and ecologically relevant regional scale concentrations of triclosan in rivers for use in higher-tier aquatic risk assessments. Environ Int 36:521–526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    USEPA (2008) Ecological hazard and environmental revised risk assessment – Triclosan. http://www.oehha.org/prop65/public_meetings/052909coms/triclosan/ciba11.pdf. Accessed 15 June 2014
  43. 43.
    USEPA (2008) Ecological hazard and environmental revised risk assessment – Triclocarbon. http://www.epa.gov/hpvis/rbp/101-20-2_Triclocarban_Web_April%202009.pdf. Accessed 15 June 2014
  44. 44.
    Schebb NH, Flores I, Kurobe T, Franze B, Ranganathan A, Hammock BD, Teh SJ (2011) Bioconcentration, metabolism and excretion of triclocarban in larval Qurt medaka (Oryzias latipes). Aquat Toxicol 105:448–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Reiss R, Mackay N, Habig C, Griffin J (2002) An ecological risk assessment for triclosan in lotic systems following discharge from wastewater treatment plants in the United States. Environ Toxicol Chem 21:2483–2492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Wu C, Spongberg AL, Witter JD, Fang M, Czajkowski KP (2010) Uptake of pharmaceutical and personal care products by soybean plants from soils applied with biosolids and irrigated with contaminated water. Environ Sci Tech 44:6157–6161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Sanchez-Prado L, Alvarez-Rivera G, Lamas JP, Lores M, Garcia-Jares C, Llompart M (2011) Analysis of multi-class preservatives in leave-on and rinse-off cosmetics by matrix solid-phase dispersion. Anal Bioanal Chem 401:3293–3304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Soto AM, Sonnenschein C, Chung KL, Fernandez MF, Olea N, Serrano FO (1995) The E-SCREEN assay as a tool to identify estrogens: an update on estrogenic environmental pollutants. Environ Health Perspect 103:113–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Rodil R, Quintana JB, Basaglia G, Pietrogrande MC, Cela R (2010) Determination of synthetic phenolic antioxidants and their metabolites in water samples by downscaled solid-phase extraction, silylation and gas chromatography–mass spectrometry. J Chromatogr A 1217:6428–6435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Costanzo SD, Watkinson AJ, Murby EJ, Kolpin DW, Sandstrom MW (2007) Is there a risk associated with the insect repellent DEET (N, N-diethyl-m-toluamide) commonly found in aquatic environments? Sci Total Environ 384:214–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Rodil R, Moeder M (2008) Stir bar sorptive extraction coupled to thermodesorption–gas chromatography–mass spectrometry for the determination of insect repelling substances in water samples. J Chromatogr A 1178:9–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Mottaleb MA, Usenko S, O’Donnell JG, Ramirez AJ, Brooks BW, Chambliss CK (2009) Gas chromatography–mass spectrometry screening methods for select UV filters, synthetic musks, alkylphenols, an antimicrobial agent, and an insect repellent in fish. J Chromatogr A 1216:815–823CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Tas JW, Balk F, Ford RA, van de Plassche EJ (1997) Environmental risk assessment of musk ketone and musk xylene in the Netherlands in accordance with the EU-TGD. Chemosphere 35:2973–3002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Giokas DL, Salvador A, Chisvert A (2007) UV filters: from sunscreens to human body and the environment. TrAC Trends Anal Chem 26:360–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Balmer ME, Buser HR, Muller MD, Poiger T (2005) Occurrence of some organic UV filters in wastewater, in surface waters, and in fish from Swiss Lakes. Environ Sci Tech 39:953–962CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Danovaro R, Bongiorni L, Corinaldesi C, Giovannelli D, Damiani E, Astolfi P, Greci L, Pusceddu A (2008) Sunscreens cause coral bleaching by promoting viral infections. Environ Health Perspect 116:441–447Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Díaz-Cruz MS, Llorca M, Barcelo D (2008) Organic UV filters and their photodegradates, metabolites and disinfection by-products in the aquatic environment. TrAC Trends Anal Chem 27:873–887CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Gago-Ferrero P, Díaz-Cruz MS, Barceló D (2012) An overview of UV-absorbing compounds (organic UV filters) in aquatic biota. Anal Bioanal Chem 404:2597–2610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Diaz-Cruz MS, Barcelo D (2009) Chemical analysis and ecotoxicological effects of organic UV-absorbing compounds in aquatic ecosystems. TrAC Trends Anal Chem 28:708–717CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Janna H, Scrimshaw MD, Williams RJ, Churchley J, Sumpter JP (2011) From dishwasher to tap? Xenobiotic substances benzotriazole and tolyltriazole in the environment. Environ Sci Tech 45:3858–3864CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Kim J-W, Isobe T, Ramaswamy BR, Chang K-H, Amano A, Miller TM, Siringan FP, Tanabe S (2011) Contamination and bioaccumulation of benzotriazole ultraviolet stabilizers in fish from Manila Bay, the Philippines using an ultra-fast liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry. Chemosphere 85:751–758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Zhang Z, Qi H, Ren N, Li Y, Gao D, Kannan K (2011) Survey of cyclic and linear siloxanes in sediment from the songhua river and in sewage sludge from wastewater treatment plants, northeastern china. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 60:204–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Wang D-G, Norwood W, Alaee M, Byer JD, Brimble S (2013) Review of recent advances in research on the toxicity, detection, occurrence and fate of cyclic volatile methyl siloxanes in the environment. Chemosphere 93:711–725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Hong WJ, Jia H, Liu C, Zhang Z, Sun Y, Li YF (2014) Distribution, source, fate and bioaccumulation of methyl siloxanes in marine environment. Environ Pollut 191:175–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Richardson SD, Ternes TA (2014) Water analysis: emerging contaminants and current issues. Anal Chem 86:2813–2848CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Ricart M, Guasch H, Alberch M, Barcelo D, Bonnineau C, Geiszinger A, Farre ML, Ferrer J, Ricciardi F, Romaní AM, Morin S, Proia L, Sala L, Sureda D, Sabater S (2010) Triclosan persistence through wastewater treatment plants and its potential toxic effects on river biofilms. Aquat Toxicol 100:346–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    McMurry LM, Oethinger M, Levy SB (1998) Triclosan targets lipid synthesis. Nature 394:531–532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Kristiansson E, Fick J, Janzon A, Grabic R, Rutgersson C, Weijdegard B, Soderstrom H, Larsson DGJ (2011) Pyrosequencing of antibiotic-contaminated river sediments reveals high levels of resistance and gene transfer elements. PLoS One 6:e17038CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Walsh TR, Weeks J, Livermore DM, Toleman MA (2011) Dissemination of NDM-1 positive bacteria in the New Delhi environment and its implications for human health: an environmental point prevalence study. Lancet Infect Dis 11:355–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    European Commission (2009) Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks, assessment of the antibiotic resistance. Effects of biocides. http://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/consultations/public_consultations/scenihr_cons_09_en.htm. Accessed 30 June 2014
  71. 71.
    Middleton JH, Salierno JD (2013) Antibiotic resistance in triclosan tolerant fecal coliforms isolated from surface waters near wastewater treatment plant outflows (Morris County, NJ, USA). Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 88:79–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Amin A, Chauhan S, Dare M, Bansal AK (2010) Degradation of parabens by Pseudomonas beteli and Burkholderia latens. Eur J Pharm Biopharm 75:206–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Environmental Biotechnology School of Environmental SciencesBharathidasan UniversityTiruchirappalliIndia

Personalised recommendations