In recent years, the potential health effects of endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) have garnered significant attention from scientists, healthcare professionals, and the public alike. These chemicals, found in the environment (e.g. water, soil, air) and many everyday products (e.g. plastics, pesticides, electronics, and cosmetics) can interfere with the body’s endocrine system and lead to a variety of health issues. An increasing amount of scientific evidence highlights the hazardous impact of EDC exposure on human health in particular within vulnerable groups such as pregnant women, children, and people in the fertile age range.
Hormones are crucial for regulating various bodily processes, including growth, metabolism, and reproduction. EDCs can mimic, block, or alter the natural hormones, leading to potential health problems – such as developmental and reproductive disorders. Common EDCs include bisphenol A (BPA), phthalates, dioxins, and certain pesticides.
Sources of EDCs include:
The health effects of EDCs include:
While it may be challenging to completely avoid EDCs, there are steps to minimize the exposure:
By understanding where harmful chemicals are found and how they can impact human health, proactive steps can be taken to reduce the exposure and protect one’s well-being. The comprehensive ENDOMIX project continues to shed light on the complexities of EDCs, and to empower evidence-informed decision making as key to safeguard our health and that of future generations.
Bergman Å, Heindel JJ, Jobling S, Kidd K, Zoeller TR, Organization WH. State of the science of endocrine disrupting chemicals 2012: World Health Organization; 2013.
Diamanti-Kandarakis E, Bourguignon J-P, Giudice LC, Hauser R, Prins GS, Soto AM, et al. Endocrine-disrupting chemicals: an Endocrine Society scientific statement. Endocrine reviews. 2009;30(4):293-342.
Vandenberg LN, Colborn T, Hayes TB, Heindel JJ, Jacobs Jr DR, Lee D-H, et al. Hormones and endocrine-disrupting chemicals: low-dose effects and nonmonotonic dose responses. Endocrine reviews. 2012;33(3):378-455.