The Endocrine Society's first Scientific Statement in 2009 provided a wake-up call to the scientific community about how environmental endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) affect health and disease. Five years later, a substantially larger body of literature has solidified our understanding of plausible mechanisms underlying EDC actions and how exposures in animals and humans-especially during development-may lay the foundations for disease later in life. At this point in history, we have much stronger knowledge about how EDCs alter gene-environment interactions via physiological, cellular, molecular, and epigenetic changes, thereby producing effects in exposed individuals as well as their descendants. Causal links between exposure and manifestation of disease are substantiated by experimental animal models and are consistent with correlative epidemiological data in humans. There are several caveats because differences in how experimental animal work is conducted can lead to difficulties in drawing broad conclusions, and we must continue to be cautious about inferring causality in humans. In this second Scientific Statement, we reviewed the literature on a subset of topics for which the translational evidence is strongest: 1) obesity and diabetes; 2) female reproduction; 3) male reproduction; 4) hormone-sensitive cancers in females; 5) prostate; 6) thyroid; and 7) neurodevelopment and neuroendocrine systems. Our inclusion criteria for studies were those conducted predominantly in the past 5 years deemed to be of high quality based on appropriate negative and positive control groups or populations, adequate sample size and experimental design, and mammalian animal studies with exposure levels in a range that was relevant to humans. We also focused on studies using the developmental origins of health and disease model. No report was excluded based on a positive or negative effect of the EDC exposure. The bulk of the results across the board strengthen the evidence for endocrine health-related actions of EDCs. Based on this much more complete understanding of the endocrine principles by which EDCs act, including nonmonotonic dose-responses, low-dose effects, and developmental vulnerability, these findings can be much better translated to human health. Armed with this information, researchers, physicians, and other healthcare providers can guide regulators and policymakers as they make responsible decisions.

This Executive Summary to the Endocrine Society's second Scientific Statement on environmental endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) provides a synthesis of the key points of the complete statement. The full Scientific Statement represents a comprehensive review of the literature on seven topics for which there is strong mechanistic, experimental, animal, and epidemiological evidence for endocrine disruption, namely: obesity and diabetes, female reproduction, male reproduction, hormone-sensitive cancers in females, prostate cancer, thyroid, and neurodevelopment and neuroendocrine systems. EDCs such as bisphenol A, phthalates, pesticides, persistent organic pollutants such as polychlorinated biphenyls, polybrominated diethyl ethers, and dioxins were emphasized because these chemicals had the greatest depth and breadth of available information. The Statement also included thorough coverage of studies of developmental exposures to EDCs, especially in the fetus and infant, because these are critical life stages during which perturbations of hormones can increase the probability of a disease or dysfunction later in life. A conclusion of the Statement is that publications over the past 5 years have led to a much fuller understanding of the endocrine principles by which EDCs act, including nonmonotonic dose-responses, low-dose effects, and developmental vulnerability. These findings will prove useful to researchers, physicians, and other healthcare providers in translating the science of endocrine disruption to improved public health.

Background: In 2007, an expert panel reviewed associations between bisphenol A (BPA) exposure and reproductive health outcomes. Since then, new studies have been conducted on the impact of BPA on reproduction. Objective: In this review, we summarize data obtained since 2007, focusing on a) findings from human and animal studies, b) the effects of BPA on a variety of reproductive end points, and c) mechanisms of BPA action. Methods: We reviewed the literature published from 2007 to 2013 using a PubMed search based on keywords related to BPA and male and female reproduction. Discussion: Because BPA has been reported to affect the onset of meiosis in both animal and in vitro models, interfere with germ cell nest breakdown in animal models, accelerate follicle transition in several animal species, alter steroidogenesis in multiple animal models and women, and reduce oocyte quality in animal models and women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF), we consider it an ovarian toxicant. In addition, strong evidence suggests that BPA is a uterine toxicant because it impaired uterine endometrial proliferation, decreased uterine receptivity, and increased implantation failure in animal models. BPA exposure may be associated with adverse birth outcomes, hyperandrogenism, sexual dysfunction, and impaired implantation in humans, but additional studies are required to confirm these associations. Studies also suggest that BPA may be a testicular toxicant in animal models, but the data in humans are equivocal. Finally, insufficient evidence exists regarding effects of BPA on the oviduct, the placenta, and pubertal development. Conclusion: Based on reports that BPA impacts female reproduction and has the potential to affect male reproductive systems in humans and animals, we conclude that BPA is a reproductive toxicant. Citation: Peretz J, Vrooman L, Ricke WA, Hunt PA, Ehrlich S, Hauser R, Padmanabhan V, Taylor HS, Swan SH, VandeVoort CA, Flaws JA. 2014. Bisphenol A and reproductive health: update of experimental and human evidence, 2007–2013. Environ Health Perspect 122:775–786; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1307728

Research from JAMA — Ability of Exercise Testing to Predict Cardiovascular and All-Cause Death in Asymptomatic Women — A 20-Year Follow-up of the Lipid Research Clinics Prevalence Study — ContextThe value of exercise testing in women has been questioned.ObjectiveTo determine the prognostic value of exercise testing in a population-based cohort of asymptomatic women followed up for 20 years.Design and SettingNear-maximal Bruce-protocol treadmill test data from the Lipid Research Clinics Prevalence Study (1972-1976) with follow-up through 1995.ParticipantsA total of 2994 asymptomatic North American women, aged 30 to 80 years, without known cardiovascular disease.Main Outcome MeasuresCardiovascular and all-cause mortality.ResultsThere were 427 (14%) deaths during 20 years of follow-up, of which 147 were due to cardiovascular causes. Low exercise capacity, low heart rate recovery (HRR), and not achieving target heart rate were independently associated with increased all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. There was no increased cardiovascular death risk for exercise-induced ST-segment depression (age-adjusted hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57-1.80; P = .96). The age-adjusted hazard ratio for cardiovascular death for every metabolic equivalent (MET) decrement in exercise capacity was 1.20 (95% CI, 1.18-1.30; P<.001); for every 10 beats per minute decrement in HRR, the hazard ratio was 1.36 (95% CI, 1.19-1.55; P<.001). After adjusting for multiple other risk factors, women who were below the median for both exercise capacity and HRR had a 3.5-fold increased risk of cardiovascular death (95% CI, 1.57-7.86; P = .002) compared with those above the median for both variables. Among women with low risk Framingham scores, those with below median levels of both exercise capacity and HRR had significantly increased risk compared with women who had above median levels of these 2 exercise variables, 44.5 and 3.5 cardiovascular deaths per 10 000 person-years, respectively (hazard ratio for cardiovascular death, 12.93; 95% CI, 5.62-29.73; P<.001).ConclusionThe prognostic value of exercise testing in asymptomatic women derives not from electrocardiographic ischemia but from fitness-related variables.

Phthalates are commonly used as plasticizers in the manufacturing of flexible polyvinyl chloride products. Large production volumes of phthalates and their widespread use in common consumer, medical, building, and personal care products lead to ubiquitous human exposure via oral ingestion, inhalation, and dermal contact. Recently, several phthalates have been classified as reproductive toxicants and endocrine disrupting chemicals based on their ability to interfere with normal reproductive function and hormone signaling. Therefore, exposure to phthalates represents a public health concern. Currently, the effects of phthalates on male reproduction are better understood than the effects on female reproduction. This is of concern because women are often exposed to higher levels of phthalates than men through their extensive use of personal care and cosmetic products. In the female, a primary regulator of reproductive and endocrine function is the ovary. Specifically, the ovary is responsible for folliculogenesis, the proper maturation of gametes for fertilization, and steroidogenesis, and the synthesis of necessary sex steroid hormones. Any defect in the regulation of these processes can cause complications for reproductive and non-reproductive health. For instance, phthalate-induced defects in folliculogenesis and steroidogenesis can cause infertility, premature ovarian failure, and non-reproductive disorders. Presently, there is a paucity of knowledge on the effects of phthalates on normal ovarian function; however, recent work has established the ovary as a target of phthalate toxicity. This review summarizes what is currently known about the effects of phthalates on the ovary and the mechanisms by which phthalates exert ovarian toxicity, with a particular focus on the effects on folliculogenesis and steroidogenesis. Further, this review outlines future directions including the necessity of examining the effects of phthalates at doses that mimic human exposure.

Anthropogenic contaminants in water can impose risks to reproductive health. Most of these compounds are known to be endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs). EDCs can impact the endocrine system and subsequently impair the development and fertility of non-human animals and humans. The source of chemical contamination in water is diverse, originating from byproducts formed during water disinfection processes, release from industry and livestock activity, or therapeutic drugs released into sewage. This review discusses the occurrence of EDCs in water such as disinfection byproducts, fluorinated compounds, bisphenol A, phthalates, pesticides, and estrogens, and it outlines their adverse reproductive effects in non-human animals and humans.