Glyphosate and Paraquat in Maternal and Fetal Serums in Thai Women

Kongtip, Pornpimol; Nankongnab, Noppanun; Phupancharoensuk, Ratanavadee; Palarach, Chonlada; Sujirarat, Dusit; Sangprasert, Supha; Sermsuk, Malasod; Sawattrakool, Namthip; Woskie, Susan

doi:10.1080/1059924x.2017.1319315

Cited by 88 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One such study focused on 82 Thai women during their seventh month of pregnancy. Kongtip et al [42] reported the number of women falling within progressively higher levels of glyphosate in maternal serum and umbilical cord blood. Levels varied by some 100-to 200-fold, as evident in Fig.…”

Section: More Data Needed On the Distribution Of Exposure Levelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How did the US EPA and IARC reach diametrically opposed conclusions on the genotoxicity of glyphosate-based herbicides?

Benbrook

2019

Environ Sci Eur

134

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The US EPA considers glyphosate as "not likely to be carcinogenic to humans. " The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified glyphosate as "probably carcinogenic to humans (Group 2A). " EPA asserts that there is no convincing evidence that "glyphosate induces mutations in vivo via the oral route. " IARC concludes there is "strong evidence" that exposure to glyphosate is genotoxic through at least two mechanisms known to be associated with human carcinogens (DNA damage, oxidative stress). Why and how did EPA and IARC reach such different conclusions? Results: A total of 52 genotoxicity assays done by registrants were cited by the EPA in its 2016 evaluation of technical glyphosate, and another 52 assays appeared in the public literature. Of these, one regulatory assay (2%) and 35 published assays (67%) reported positive evidence of a genotoxic response. In the case of formulated, glyphosatebased herbicides (GBHs), 43 regulatory assays were cited by EPA, plus 65 assays published in peer-reviewed journals. Of these, none of the regulatory, and 49 published assays (75%) reported evidence of a genotoxic response following exposure to a GBH. IARC considered a total of 118 genotoxicity assays in six core tables on glyphosate technical, GBHs, and aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA), glyphosate's primary metabolite. EPA's analysis encompassed 51 of these 118 assays (43%). In addition, IARC analyzed another 81 assays exploring other possible genotoxic mechanisms (mostly related to sex hormones and oxidative stress), of which 62 (77%) reported positive results. IARC placed considerable weight on three positive GBH studies in exposed human populations, whereas EPA placed little or no weight on them. Conclusions: EPA and IARC reached diametrically opposed conclusions on glyphosate genotoxicity for three primary reasons: (1) in the core tables compiled by EPA and IARC, the EPA relied mostly on registrant-commissioned, unpublished regulatory studies, 99% of which were negative, while IARC relied mostly on peer-reviewed studies of which 70% were positive (83 of 118); (2) EPA's evaluation was largely based on data from studies on technical glyphosate, whereas IARC's review placed heavy weight on the results of formulated GBH and AMPA assays; (3) EPA's evaluation was focused on typical, general population dietary exposures assuming legal, food-crop uses, and did not take into account, nor address generally higher occupational exposures and risks. IARC's assessment encompassed data from typical dietary, occupational, and elevated exposure scenarios. More research is needed on real-world exposures to the chemicals within formulated GBHs and the biological fate and consequences of such exposures.

show abstract

Section: More Data Needed On the Distribution Of Exposure Levelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How did the US EPA and IARC reach diametrically opposed conclusions on the genotoxicity of glyphosate-based herbicides?

Benbrook

2019

Environ Sci Eur

134

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We identified 1,908 records and included 19 studies in our final qualitative analysis ( Figure 1). Seventeen studies [10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26] were peer-reviewed and two were preprints [27,28]. Quality appraisal is included in Tables 1, S2 and S3.…”

Section: Summary Of Included Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. (which was not certified by peer review) preprint and/or PLWH without COVID-19, [11,12,14,15,23,25,26], two studies compared only to a HIV-negative cohort [13,19], two studies compared only cohorts of PLWH with and without COVID-19 [17,22] and three studies compared only the characteristics of PLWH with different COVID-19 disease severity [20,21,24].…”

Section: Summary Of Included Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A US hospital study found that PLWH and COVID-19 who survived were more likely to have been treated with NRTIs that those PLWH who died (99% vs 89%, p=0.04) in univariate analysis [13]. Seven smaller studies (n=18-93 PLWH with COVID- 19) reported no significant association between ART-regimen and COVID-19 severity amongst PLWH [14,15,17,[20][21][22][23][24].…”

Section: Impact Of Art Regimen On Covid-19 Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Risk of adverse COVID-19 outcomes for people living with HIV: a rapid review and meta-analysis

Mellor

Bast

Jones

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To assess whether people living with HIV (PLWH) are at increased risk of COVID-19 mortality or adverse outcomes, and whether antiretroviral therapy (ART) influences this risk. Design: Rapid review with meta-analysis and narrative synthesis. Methods: We searched databases including Embase, Medline, medRxiv, and Google Scholar up to 26th August 2020 for studies describing COVID-19 outcomes in PLWH and conducted a meta-analysis of higher quality studies. Results: We identified 1,908 studies and included 19 in the review. In a meta-analysis of five studies, PLWH had a higher risk of COVID-19 mortality (hazard ratio (HR) 1.93, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.59-2.34) compared to people without HIV. Risk of death remained elevated for PLWH in a subgroup analysis of hospitalised cohorts (HR 1.54, 95% CI: 1.05-2.24) and studies of PLWH across all settings (HR 2.08, 95%CI: 1.69-2.56). Eight other studies assessed the association between HIV and COVID-19 outcomes, but provided inconclusive, lower-quality evidence due to potential confounding and selection bias. There were insufficient data on the effect of CD4+ T cell count and HIV viral load on COVID-19 outcomes. Eleven studies reported COVID-19 outcomes by ART-regimen. In the two largest studies, tenofovir-disoproxil-fumarate (TDF)-based regimens were associated with a lower risk of adverse COVID-19 outcomes, although these analyses are susceptible to confounding by comorbidities. Conclusion: Evidence is emerging that suggests a moderately increased risk of COVID-19 mortality amongst PLWH. Further investigation into the relationship between COVID-19 outcomes and CD4+ T cell count, HIV viral load, ART and the use of TDF is warranted.

show abstract

“…In recent years, glyphosate and its major metabolite, aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA), have been detected in surface water, sediments and soil that surround horticultural production areas of different regions of Argentina (Aparicio et al, 2013;Bonansea et al, 2017;Lupi et al, 2015;Mac Loughlin et al, 2017;Primost et al, 2017;Ronco et al, 2016). These pesticide residues have also been detected in foodstuff (EFSA, 2017) and human urine (Connolly et al, 2017;Goen et al, 2017;Mills et al, 2017;Parvez et al, 2018) and serum samples (Kongtip et al, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Postnatal exposure to a glyphosate-based herbicide modifies mammary gland growth and development in Wistar male rats

Altamirano

Delconte

Gómez

et al. 2018

Food and Chemical Toxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our aim was to evaluate whether postnatal exposure to a glyphosate-based herbicide (GBH) modifies mammary gland development in pre- and post-pubertal male rats. From postnatal day 1 (PND1) to PND7, male rats were injected subcutaneously every 48 h with either saline solution (vehicle) or 2 mg GBH/kg·bw. On PND21 and PND60, mammary gland and blood samples were collected. Estradiol (E2) and testosterone (T) serum levels, mammary gland histology, collagen fiber organization, mast cell infiltration, proliferation index, and estrogen (ESR1) and androgen receptor (AR) expression levels were evaluated. At PND21, GBH-exposed male rats exhibited greater development of the mammary gland with increased stromal collagen organization and terminal end buds (TEBs) compared to control rats. At PND60, the number of TEBs remained high and was accompanied by an increase in mast cell infiltration, proliferation and ESR1 expression in GBH-exposed male rats. In contrast, no effects were observed in E2 and T serum levels and AR expression in both days studied. Our results showed that a postnatal subacute treatment with GBH induces endocrine-disrupting effects in the male mammary gland in vivo, altering its normal development.

show abstract

Glyphosate and Paraquat in Maternal and Fetal Serums in Thai Women

Cited by 88 publications

References 19 publications

How did the US EPA and IARC reach diametrically opposed conclusions on the genotoxicity of glyphosate-based herbicides?

How did the US EPA and IARC reach diametrically opposed conclusions on the genotoxicity of glyphosate-based herbicides?

Risk of adverse COVID-19 outcomes for people living with HIV: a rapid review and meta-analysis

Postnatal exposure to a glyphosate-based herbicide modifies mammary gland growth and development in Wistar male rats

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About