Social Science Environmental Health Research Institute, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
Silent Spring Institute, Newton, MA, 02460, USA.
Curr Environ Health Rep. 2024 Jun;11(2):118-127. doi: 10.1007/s40572-024-00441-y. Epub 2024 Mar 25.
The discovery of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in the environment and humans worldwide has ignited scientific research, government inquiry, and public concern over numerous adverse health effects associated with PFAS exposure. In this review, we discuss the use of PFAS immunotoxicity data in regulatory and clinical decision-making contexts and question whether recent efforts adequately account for PFAS immunotoxicity in public health decision-making.
Government and academic reviews confirm the strongest human evidence for PFAS immunotoxicity is reduced antibody production in response to vaccinations, particularly for tetanus and diphtheria. However, recent events, such as the economic analysis supporting the proposed national primary drinking water regulations and clinical monitoring recommendations, indicate a failure to adequately incorporate these data into regulatory and clinical decisions. To be more protective of public health, we recommend using all relevant immunotoxicity data to inform current and future PFAS-related chemical risk assessment and regulation. Biological measures of immune system effects, such as reduced antibody levels in response to vaccination, should be used as valid and informative markers of health outcomes and risks associated with PFAS exposure. Routine toxicity testing should be expanded to include immunotoxicity evaluations in adult and developing organisms. In addition, clinical recommendations for PFAS-exposed individuals and communities should be revisited and strengthened to provide guidance on incorporating immune system monitoring and other actions that can be taken to protect against adverse health outcomes.
全氟和多氟烷基物质(PFAS)在全球环境和人类中的发现引发了科学研究、政府调查和公众对与 PFAS 暴露相关的许多不良健康影响的关注。在这篇综述中,我们讨论了将 PFAS 免疫毒性数据用于监管和临床决策背景下的情况,并质疑最近的努力是否充分考虑了 PFAS 免疫毒性在公共卫生决策中的作用。
政府和学术审查都证实,人类 PFAS 免疫毒性的最强证据是疫苗接种后抗体产生减少,特别是破伤风和白喉疫苗。然而,最近发生的事件,如支持拟议的国家饮用水基本规定和临床监测建议的经济分析,表明未能将这些数据充分纳入监管和临床决策。为了更好地保护公众健康,我们建议使用所有相关的免疫毒性数据来为当前和未来的 PFAS 相关化学风险评估和监管提供信息。免疫系统效应的生物测量指标,如疫苗接种后抗体水平降低,应作为与 PFAS 暴露相关的健康结果和风险的有效和信息性标志物。应扩大常规毒性测试,以包括对成年和发育中生物体的免疫毒性评估。此外,应重新审视和加强针对 PFAS 暴露个体和社区的临床建议,以提供有关纳入免疫系统监测和采取其他措施来预防不良健康结果的指导。