Vinaora Nivo Slider

The Cardno ChemRisk View

  • Home
    Home This is where you can find all the blog posts throughout the site.
  • Categories
    Categories Displays a list of categories from this blog.
  • Tags
    Tags Displays a list of tags that have been used in the blog.
  • Bloggers
    Bloggers Search for your favorite blogger from this site.
  • Archives
    Archives Contains a list of blog posts that were created previously.
  • Login
    Login Login form
Recent blog posts

Posted by on in Centers of Excellence

Posted on behalf of Josh Maskrey.

...
Continue reading
Hits: 17
Rate this blog entry:

Posted by on in Centers of Excellence

Cardno ChemRisk’s publication “A human health risk assessment of lead (Pb) ingestion among adult wine consumers” was recently named one of the top three highly accessed articles in the International Journal of Food Contamination.  Cardno ChemRisk scientists analyzed Pb concentration in wines and modeled adult blood lead levels from wine consumption under various exposure scenarios based on national dietary survey data. Overall, our findings suggest that Pb content in wine does not pose a health risk to adult wine consumers.  You can read our original blog about this paper here.

Hits: 73
Rate this blog entry:
0

Posted by on in Centers of Excellence
Posted on behalf of Angela Perez, Paul Scott and Andrew Monnot.

The per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFASare a family of perfluorinated and polyfluorinated chemicals that have been used extensively since the 1950s in commercial applications, including surfactants, lubricants, paper and textile coatings, polishes, food packaging, and fire-fighting foams. Some of these PFAS, including perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), persist in humans and the environment, and have been detected worldwide in wildlife. 

Two senior toxicologists at Cardno ChemRisk, Drs. Angie Perez and Andy Monnot, presented research on key PFAS exposure and risk assessment issues at the 2017 International DIOXIN Symposia, held in Vancouver, Canada from August 21 -25th.  Dr. Perez presented a meta-analysis of crop uptake factors for PFAS. The objective of Dr. Perez’s research was to provide a state-of-the science review on PFAS uptake in plants intended for human and animal consumption, and to conduct a screening level human health risk assessment for consumption of PFAS based on the following: i) in which crops PFASs have been detected; ii) at what concentrations are PFASs detected; iii) which PFASs have been previously detected in crops; and iv) where in the plant PFASs tend to accumulate, if at all. Additionally, known sources of PFAS deposition in soil and anticipated source deposition trends, based on commercial use patterns, were described.


Dr. Monnot presented a poster entitled An Evaluation of Federal and State Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) Drinking Water Standards in the US.  The purpose of this research was to compare the federal and state drinking water standards for PFOA in light of the recent US EPA lifetime drinking water Health Advisory for PFOA of 0.01 µg/L.  A total of 10 PFOA drinking water standards were identified, ranging from 0.014 to 1.6 µg/L.  Each state used a variety of different assumptions to derive its PFOA drinking water standards. We found that only rarely was there any attempt to evaluate background exposures to PFOA; instead, most states employed a single “default” relative source contribution (RSC) factor, which may over-estimate PFOA’s true background exposures.  

A third poster, authored by Paul K. Scott, a senior risk assessor and expert statistician at Cardno ChemRisk with over 26 years’ experience, was presented by Dr. Monnot and titled A Probabilistic Evaluation of the 2016 U.S. EPA Health Advisory for Perfluorooctanoic Acid. The purpose of this analysis was to determine if some of the factors used to derive the US EPA health advisory for PFOA resulted in an overestimation of exposure and subsequent risk.  Specifically, Scott et al. determined that the relative source contribution (RSC) factor used by the US EPA is not consistent with the information in the scientific literature on background exposures to PFOA from non-drinking water sources. In this study, alternate values for the health advisory were calculated based on more realistic assumptions for the relative source contribution (RSC).  Using alternate values for the drinking water ingestion rate and the RSC resulted in health advisories for lactating women that ranged from 0.2 to 0.76 µg/L, and for the general population that ranged from 0.3 to 1.1 µg/L.  These results suggest that the US EPA used overly conservative assumptions when deriving its health advisory.

Cardno ChemRisk scientists have conducted numerous exposure studies and human health risk assessments pertaining to PFAS. Examples of Cardno ChemRisk’s key PFAS projects include a retrospective exposure assessment for PFOA; a critical review of the findings of the C8 Health Project panel; preparation of supporting documents for Canadian Soil Quality Guidelines; preparation of estimated daily intakes of PFAS from outdoor and indoor air, dust, soil, food, drinking water, and consumer products; and a hazard evaluation and human health risk assessment for a farm after 20 years of land application of biosolids. Cardno ChemRisk scientists also regularly present on the topic of PFAS. Recently, Dr. Perez presented a webinar with Earl Hagström of Sedgwick Law in San Francisco titled Beyond PFOA and PFOS — the Next Wave of Perfluorochemicals-Related Liability”. 

If you would like to learn more about our PFAS capabilities, please contact Paul Scott at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it  or Angela Perez at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .  
Hits: 75
Rate this blog entry:
Posted by on in Centers of Excellence

Posted on behalf of Rachel Novick and Alison Bowman. 

...
Continue reading
Hits: 852
Rate this blog entry:

Posted by on in Centers of Excellence
Posted on behalf of Kevin Towle

Silicone breast implants have been used for augmentation or reconstructive breast surgeries since the 1960s. However, as their popularity skyrocketed, concerns began to arise regarding a potential link between the implants and autoimmune or connective tissue diseases. Numerous studies were conducted on this issue in the 1980s and beyond, yielding mixed results. In 1992, the FDA issued a moratorium on silicone implants for safety assessment, and this ban remained in effect until 2006. Today, silicone implants are used in 84% of breast augmentation surgeries. According to the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, there were approximately 243,600 silicone breast augmentations in 2016.

During the FDA's moratorium, in 2000, a meta-analysis was conducted that examined 20 studies between 1984 and 1999. This analysis found no association between silicone breast implants and autoimmune disease. Since then, tools for autoimmune disease diagnosis have improved. Subsequent studies utilizing these tools found positive associations in previously unexamined cohorts, which demonstrated a need for an updated meta-analysis to quantitatively measure any association between silicone implants and autoimmune disease.

In 2016, Cardno ChemRisk conducted a meta-analysis of the results of 20 cohort and nine case control studies. Silicone breast implants were associated with a non-statistically significant decreased risk for all connective tissue diseases, meta-RR 0.87 (95% CI: 0.62-1.21). When stratified by disease, silicone breast implants were associated with a non-statistically significant increased risk of sclerosis, meta-RR 1.14 (0.75-1.74), and a non-statistically significant decreased risk of rheumatoid arthritis, meta-RR 0.75 (95% CI: 0.52-1.08), and systemic lupus erythematosus, meta-RR 0.90 (95% CI: 0.43-1.87). These findings suggest that silicone breast implant exposure is not associated with autoimmune disease among women.

If you would like to receive more information on this topic, please contact Dr. Andrew Monnot
Hits: 1070
Rate this blog entry:

The Cardno ChemRisk View

We're glad you decided to check us out.

Cardno ChemRisk is a respected scientific consulting firm headquartered in San Francisco with locations and consultants across the U.S. While our website provides a formal look at our capabilities, the Cardno ChemRisk View provides an informal voice too. Various Cardno ChemRisk consultants will be sharing news and views about current trends, happenings and methodologies in the industry. We’ll also highlight activities of interest at Cardno ChemRisk, within confidentiality restrictions of course.

The intent is to keep you informed and enable productive conversations, so please join in and get to know our staff and what makes our people unique. We are enthusiastic about the blogging experience and hope you will return often to learn and share. Stay tuned by subscribing to our blog or clicking on the RSS feed.