Bus James S
Exponent, Inc., 1800 Diagonal Road, Suite 500, Alexandria, VA, 22314, USA.
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2015 Dec;73(3):758-64. doi: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2015.10.022. Epub 2015 Oct 28.
The non-peer-reviewed biomonitoring report published online by Moms Across America (MAA; Honeycutt and Rowlands, 2014) does not support the conclusion that glyphosate concentrations detected in a limited number of urine samples from women, men and children, or breast milk from nursing mothers, pose a health risk to the public, including nursing children. Systemically absorbed doses of glyphosate estimated from the MAA urine biomonitoring data and from other published biomonitoring studies indicate that daily glyphosate doses are substantially below health protective reference standards (ADIs; RfDs) established by regulatory agencies. The MAA report also suggested that detection of relatively high glyphosate concentrations in breast milk in 3 of 10 sampled women raised a concern for bioaccumulation in breast milk. However, the breast milk concentrations reported by MAA are highly implausible when considered in context to low daily systemic doses of glyphosate estimated from human urine biomonitoring data, and also are inconsistent with animal toxicokinetic data demonstrating no evidence of retention in tissues or milk after single- or multiple-dose glyphosate treatment. In addition, toxicokinetic studies in lactating goats have shown that glyphosate does not partition into milk at concentrations greater than blood, and that only a very small percentage of the total administered dose (<0.03%) is ultimately excreted into milk. The toxicokinetic studies also indicate that human glyphosate exposures estimated from urine biomonitoring fall thousands-of-fold short of external doses capable of producing blood concentrations sufficient to result in the breast milk concentrations described in the MAA report. Finally, in contrast to highly lipophilic compounds with bioaccumulation potential in breast milk, the physico-chemical properties of glyphosate indicate that it is highly hydrophilic (ionized) at physiological pH and unlikely to preferentially distribute into breast milk.
全美国母亲组织(MAA;霍尼卡特和罗兰兹,2014年)在线发布的未经同行评审的生物监测报告并不支持以下结论:在有限数量的女性、男性和儿童尿液样本或哺乳期母亲的母乳中检测到的草甘膦浓度会对公众(包括哺乳期儿童)构成健康风险。根据MAA尿液生物监测数据以及其他已发表的生物监测研究估算的草甘膦全身吸收剂量表明,每日草甘膦剂量远低于监管机构制定的健康保护参考标准(每日允许摄入量;参考剂量)。MAA报告还指出,在10名抽样女性中,有3人的母乳中检测到相对较高的草甘膦浓度,这引发了对母乳中生物累积的担忧。然而,考虑到根据人体尿液生物监测数据估算的每日草甘膦低全身剂量,MAA报告的母乳浓度极不合理,而且也与动物毒代动力学数据不一致,后者表明单次或多次给予草甘膦处理后,没有证据显示草甘膦会在组织或乳汁中留存。此外,对泌乳山羊的毒代动力学研究表明,草甘膦不会以高于血液的浓度分配到乳汁中,并且最终排泄到乳汁中的总给药剂量仅占极小比例(<0.03%)。毒代动力学研究还表明,根据尿液生物监测估算的人体草甘膦暴露量比能够产生足以导致MAA报告中所述母乳浓度的血液浓度的外部剂量低数千倍。最后,与在母乳中有生物累积潜力的高亲脂性化合物不同,草甘膦的物理化学性质表明,它在生理pH值下具有高度亲水性(离子化),不太可能优先分布到母乳中。