LETTER pubs.acs.org/est
Toxic Chemicals in Toys and Children’s Products e acclaim Becker et al.1 for their timely review on toxic chemicals in toys and children’s products. We would like to clarify on the scope and limit values of contaminants from the Consumer Product Safety Act. We also would like to state the need for a comprehensive scientific approach regarding toy safety based on exposure and risk assessment including in vitro determination of oral bioavailability of potentially toxic chemicals. Concerning the toxic substances in toys and children’s product in the U.S. and Canada, main importance is given to the prevention of exposure to Pb and six phthalates. However, many other important toxic chemicals are left unaddressed. In the U.S., eight metals are regulated in paints and coating materials; whereas in Canada there are limits only for Pb and Hg.2,3 For the toys themselves, there is no limit defined except for total Pb content. Unfortunately, in North America’s regulations, metal speciation is not taken into account. We specifically would like to add to Becker et al.1 that there are unregulated phthalates, and one of them was recently reported as having much higher toxicity in animal assays than currently regulated phthalates.4 The presence of nitrosamines (potential carcinogens) in rubber toys are also of concern as they are not regulated.5 Because CSPC restriction on Cd and other metals in toys mentioned by Becker et al.1 is valid only for paints and coatings (not clearly stated in the article), metal content of a toy itself can be a problem in the case of ingestion of pieces and scrapings of the toys if the metal is bioavailable in the gastro-intestinal tract. There are different studies showing the presence of elements such as As, Cd, Cr, and Pb in various toys and children’s products.6 9 Work in our laboratory also suggests the presence of other toxic elements in toys. Current regulatory gaps in the U.S. and Canada have a potential to cause serious negative consequences for children in the case of exposure to unregulated chemicals in toys. Finally, we want to add to Becker et al.1 correct mention of the new EU regulation, which puts strict limits on 19 contaminants, that speciation assessment for Cr and Sn for
W
different types of toy materials10 is included in the EU regulation, and that this regulation is based on risk assessment. Although a proper assessment of contaminants' bioavailability under certain scenarios is missing (i.e., long-term impact of ingested toy materials which potentially remain in the stomach), its scientific rationale is more clear than the U.S. and Canadian regulations. Appropriate toy regulations in the U.S. and Canada should be implemented as soon as possible to protect children against potentially toxic chemicals found in toys and not only in paints and coatings. These regulations should be based on risk assessment rather than on total contaminant content. We also recommend consideration of exposure scenarios such as sucking, mouthing, and ingestion and to consider using in vitro protocols for determination of toy contaminant bioavailability. Mert Guney and Gerald J. Zagury*
(5) Altkofer, W.; Braune, S.; Ellendt, K.; Kettl-Grominger, M.; Steiner, G. Migration of nitrosamines from rubber products are ballons and condoms harmful to the human health?. Mol. Nutr. Food Res. 2005, 49, 235– 238. (6) Kawamura, Y.; Kawasaki, C.; Mine, S.; Mutsuga, M.; Tanamoto, K. Contents of Eight Harmful Elements in Baby Toys and Their Migration Tests. J. Food Hyg. Soc. Jpn. 2006, 47 (2), 51–57. (7) Kumar, A.; Pastore, P. Lead and cadmium in soft plastic toys. Curr. Sci. India 2007, 93 (6), 818–822. (8) Rastogi, S. C.; Pritzl, G. Migration of Some Toxic Metals from Crayons and Water Colors. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 1996, 56 (4), 527–533. (9) Weidenhamer, J. D.; Clement, M. L. Widespread lead contamination of imported low-cost jewelry in the US. Chemosphere 2007, 67 (5), 961–965. (10) European Council. Directive 2009/ 48/EC of the European Parliament, 2009; http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ: l:2009:170:SOM:EN:HTML.
Department of Civil, Geological and Mining Engineering, Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada
’ AUTHOR INFORMATION Corresponding Author
*E-mail:
[email protected]; telephone: 1 (514) 340-4711, ext. 4980.
’ REFERENCES (1) Becker, M.; Edwards, S.; Massey, R. I. Toxic Chemicals in Toys and Children’s Products: Limitations of Current Responses and Recommendations for Government and Industry. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2010, 44, 7986– 7991. (2) ASTM International. F963-08: Standard Consumer Safety Specification for Toy Safety, 2008; http://www.astm.org/Standards/F963.htm. (3) Health Canada. Surface Coating Materials Regulations, 2005; http://www.hcsc.gc.ca/cps-spc/legislation/acts-lois/coatingrevetements-eng.php. (4) Hannas, B. R.; Furr, J.; Lambright, C. S.; Wilson, V. S.; Foster, P. M. D.; Gray, L. E. Di-pentyl phthalate dosing during sexual differentiation disrupts fetal testis function and postnatal development of the male Sprague Dawley rat with greater relative potency than other phthalates. Toxicol. Sci. 2011, 120, 184– 193.
r 2011 American Chemical Society
3819
Published: March 23, 2011
dx.doi.org/10.1021/es200810s | Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45, 3819–3819
