1
|
Zarus GM, Ruiz P, Benedict R, Brenner S, Carlson K, Jeong L, Morata TC. Which Environmental Pollutants Are Toxic to Our Ears?-Evidence of the Ototoxicity of Common Substances. TOXICS 2024; 12:650. [PMID: 39330578 PMCID: PMC11435700 DOI: 10.3390/toxics12090650] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/24/2024] [Revised: 08/27/2024] [Accepted: 08/28/2024] [Indexed: 09/28/2024]
Abstract
Ototoxicity refers to the adverse effects of substances on auditory or vestibular functions. This study examines the evidence of ototoxicity's association with exposure to common environmental pollutants, as documented in toxicological profiles by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Our aim was to evaluate whether the evidence supports modifying the charting of ototoxic effects in the summary tables of these toxicological profiles and providing a guide for scientists to access these data. Health outcomes of interest included hearing loss, vestibular effects, cochlear lesions, tonal alterations, cellular damage, and ototoxicity-related outcomes (neurological, nephrotoxic, hepatic, and developmental effects). We obtained ototoxicity information for 62 substances. Hearing-related effects were reported, along with neurological effects. Overall, 26 profiles reported strong evidence of ototoxicity, including 13 substances previously designated as ototoxic by other health and safety agencies. Commonly studied outcomes included hearing loss, damage to ear anatomy, and auditory dysfunction. Vestibular dysfunction and tinnitus are rarely studied. Our findings highlight the lack of conclusive evidence of ototoxic properties for many substances, especially for pesticides and herbicides. This review supports charting the evidence of ototoxicity separately in toxicological profiles' summary tables. Improving the communication of ototoxicity-related health effects might impact their recognition and prompt further research. A stronger evidence base could support improved prevention efforts in terms of serious health outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gregory M. Zarus
- Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Office of Innovation and Analytics, Atlanta, GA 30341, USA; (P.R.); (R.B.); (S.B.)
| | - Patricia Ruiz
- Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Office of Innovation and Analytics, Atlanta, GA 30341, USA; (P.R.); (R.B.); (S.B.)
| | - Rae Benedict
- Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Office of Innovation and Analytics, Atlanta, GA 30341, USA; (P.R.); (R.B.); (S.B.)
| | - Stephan Brenner
- Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Office of Innovation and Analytics, Atlanta, GA 30341, USA; (P.R.); (R.B.); (S.B.)
| | - Krystin Carlson
- National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, OH 45226, USA; (K.C.); (T.C.M.)
| | - Layna Jeong
- Georgia Tech School of Biological Sciences, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA;
| | - Thais C. Morata
- National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, OH 45226, USA; (K.C.); (T.C.M.)
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Lobato DCB, Alcarás PADS, França DMVR, Gonçalves CGDO, Fuente A, de Lacerda ABM. Audiological findings of family farmers exposed to pesticides. Codas 2023; 35:e20220108. [PMID: 37672475 PMCID: PMC10546921 DOI: 10.1590/2317-1782/20232022108pt] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/06/2022] [Accepted: 07/21/2022] [Indexed: 09/08/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To analyze the possible differences among the hearing of farmers and their families when compared to the population not exposed to pesticides. METHODS Cross-sectional study with 70 smallholder family farmers (research group), with the mean age of 39.7 years, of both sexes and a mean of 23.7 years of exposure to pesticides. We included a control group with 71 participants of both sexes with the mean age of 39.5 years, not exposed to either noise or chemical substances, to compare the results. In stage 1, both groups were submitted to conventional and high-frequency audiometry, and acoustic immittance. In stage 2, only people with normal hearing were submitted to the evoked otoacoustic emissions and suppression effect on transient otoacoustic emissions. RESULTS Significant differences were observed between the groups in the conventional pure-tone and in the high-frequency audiometry, as well as in the acoustic reflex. The most affected frequencies in the conventional pure-tone audiometry ranged from 3 to 6 kHz and, in the high-frequency audiometry, from 9000 to 11200 Hz. As for the transient otoacoustic emissions, the worse suppression effect results were found in the research group. CONCLUSION There were differences among the hearing of family farmers and the control group. The conventional auditory thresholds are related to the group, age and sex. Farming is associated with impairments in the basal region of the cochlea, absence of acoustic reflex, reduced signal-to-noise ratio of the transient otoacoustic emissions, and dysfunction in the olivocochlear efferents of the auditory system.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Diolen Conceição Barros Lobato
- Programa de Pós-graduação “Mestrado e Doutorado” em Distúrbios da Comunicação, Universidade Tuiuti do Paraná - UTP - Curitiba (PR), Brasil.
| | - Patrícia Arruda de Souza Alcarás
- Programa de Pós-graduação “Mestrado e Doutorado” em Distúrbios da Comunicação, Universidade Tuiuti do Paraná - UTP - Curitiba (PR), Brasil.
| | | | | | - Adrian Fuente
- École d´Orthophonie et d´Audiologie, Université de Montréal - UdeM - Montréal (Québec), Canadá.
| | - Adriana Bender Moreira de Lacerda
- Programa de Pós-graduação “Mestrado e Doutorado” em Distúrbios da Comunicação, Universidade Tuiuti do Paraná - UTP - Curitiba (PR), Brasil.
- École d´Orthophonie et d´Audiologie, Université de Montréal - UdeM - Montréal (Québec), Canadá.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Zou M, Huang M, Zhang J, Chen R. Exploring the effects and mechanisms of organophosphorus pesticide exposure and hearing loss. Front Public Health 2022; 10:1001760. [PMID: 36438228 PMCID: PMC9692084 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.1001760] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/24/2022] [Accepted: 10/03/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Many environmental factors, such as noise, chemicals, and heavy metals, are mostly produced by human activities and easily induce acquired hearing loss. Organophosphorus pesticides (OPs) constitute a large variety of chemicals and have high usage with potentiate damage to human health. Moreover, their metabolites also show a serious potential contamination of soil, water, and air, leading to a serious impact on people's health. Hearing loss affects 430 million people (5.5% of the global population), bringing a heavy burden to individual patients and their families and society. However, the potential risk of hearing damage by OPs has not been taken seriously. In this study, we summarized the effects of OPs on hearing loss from epidemiological population studies and animal experiments. Furthermore, the possible mechanisms of OP-induced hearing loss are elucidated from oxidative stress, DNA damage, and inflammatory response. Overall, this review provides an overview of OP exposure alone or with noise that leads to hearing loss in human and experimental animals.
Collapse
|
4
|
Zúñiga-Venegas LA, Hyland C, Muñoz-Quezada MT, Quirós-Alcalá L, Butinof M, Buralli R, Cardenas A, Fernandez RA, Foerster C, Gouveia N, Gutiérrez Jara JP, Lucero BA, Muñoz MP, Ramírez-Santana M, Smith AR, Tirado N, van Wendel de Joode B, Calaf GM, Handal AJ, Soares da Silva A, Cortés S, Mora AM. Health Effects of Pesticide Exposure in Latin American and the Caribbean Populations: A Scoping Review. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PERSPECTIVES 2022; 130:96002. [PMID: 36173136 PMCID: PMC9521041 DOI: 10.1289/ehp9934] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/03/2021] [Revised: 08/08/2022] [Accepted: 08/12/2022] [Indexed: 05/23/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Multiple epidemiological studies have shown that exposure to pesticides is associated with adverse health outcomes. However, the literature on pesticide-related health effects in the Latin American and the Caribbean (LAC) region, an area of intensive agricultural and residential pesticide use, is sparse. We conducted a scoping review to describe the current state of research on the health effects of pesticide exposure in LAC populations with the goal of identifying knowledge gaps and research capacity building needs. METHODS We searched PubMed and SciELO for epidemiological studies on pesticide exposure and human health in LAC populations published between January 2007 and December 2021. We identified 233 publications from 16 countries that met our inclusion criteria and grouped them by health outcome (genotoxicity, neurobehavioral outcomes, placental outcomes and teratogenicity, cancer, thyroid function, reproductive outcomes, birth outcomes and child growth, and others). RESULTS Most published studies were conducted in Brazil (37%, n = 88 ) and Mexico (20%, n = 46 ), were cross-sectional in design (72%, n = 167 ), and focused on farmworkers (45%, n = 105 ) or children (21%, n = 48 ). The most frequently studied health effects included genotoxicity (24%, n = 62 ) and neurobehavioral outcomes (21%, n = 54 ), and organophosphate (OP) pesticides were the most frequently examined (26%, n = 81 ). Forty-seven percent (n = 112 ) of the studies relied only on indirect pesticide exposure assessment methods. Exposure to OP pesticides, carbamates, or to multiple pesticide classes was consistently associated with markers of genotoxicity and adverse neurobehavioral outcomes, particularly among children and farmworkers. DISCUSSION Our scoping review provides some evidence that exposure to pesticides may adversely impact the health of LAC populations, but methodological limitations and inconsistencies undermine the strength of the conclusions. It is critical to increase capacity building, integrate research initiatives, and conduct more rigorous epidemiological studies in the region to address these limitations, better inform public health surveillance systems, and maximize the impact of research on public policies. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP9934.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Liliana A. Zúñiga-Venegas
- Centro de Investigaciones de Estudios Avanzados del Maule, Universidad Católica del Maule, Talca, Chile
| | - Carly Hyland
- Center for Environmental Research and Community Health, School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California, USA
- School of Public Health and Population Science, Boise State University, Boise, Idaho, USA
| | - María Teresa Muñoz-Quezada
- Centro de Investigación en Neuropsicología y Neurociencias Cognitivas, Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad Católica del Maule, Talca, Chile
| | - Lesliam Quirós-Alcalá
- Department of Environmental Health and Engineering, Bloomberg School of Public Health, John Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
- Maryland Institute of Applied Environmental Health, School of Public Health, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA
| | - Mariana Butinof
- Facultad de Ciencias Médicas, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Córdoba, Argentina
| | - Rafael Buralli
- Departamento de Saúde Ambiental, Faculdade de Saúde Pública, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brasil
| | - Andres Cardenas
- Center for Environmental Research and Community Health, School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California, USA
| | - Ricardo A. Fernandez
- Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad Católica de Córdoba, Córdoba, Argentina
| | - Claudia Foerster
- Instituto de Ciencias de la Agroalimentarias, Animales y Ambientales, Universidad de O’Higgins, San Fernando, Chile
| | - Nelson Gouveia
- Departamento de Medicina Preventiva, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brasil
| | - Juan P. Gutiérrez Jara
- Centro de Investigaciones de Estudios Avanzados del Maule, Universidad Católica del Maule, Talca, Chile
| | - Boris A. Lucero
- Centro de Investigación en Neuropsicología y Neurociencias Cognitivas, Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad Católica del Maule, Talca, Chile
| | - María Pía Muñoz
- Escuela de Salud Pública, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile
| | - Muriel Ramírez-Santana
- Departamento de Salud Pública, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Católica del Norte, Coquimbo, Chile
| | - Anna R. Smith
- Center for Environmental Research and Community Health, School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California, USA
| | - Noemi Tirado
- Instituto de Genética, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Mayor de San Andrés, La Paz, Bolivia
| | - Berna van Wendel de Joode
- Infants’ Environmental Health Study, Central American Institute for Studies on Toxic Substances, Universidad Nacional, Heredia, Costa Rica
| | - Gloria M. Calaf
- Instituto de Alta Investigación, Universidad de Tarapacá, Arica, Chile
- Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Alexis J. Handal
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
| | | | - Sandra Cortés
- Centro Avanzado de Enfermedades Crónicas (ACCDiS), Centro de Desarrollo Urbano Sustentable, Departamento de Salud Pública, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
| | - Ana M. Mora
- Center for Environmental Research and Community Health, School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California, USA
- Infants’ Environmental Health Study, Central American Institute for Studies on Toxic Substances, Universidad Nacional, Heredia, Costa Rica
| |
Collapse
|