Bundesgesundheitsblatt

, Volume 41, Issue 8, pp 326–329 | Cite as

Hormonähnlich wirkende Stoffe in der Umwelt—Einführung und Sachstand

  • H. Greim
Article
  • 64 Downloads

Zusammenfassung

Über die hormonähnliche Wirksamkeit von Umweltchemikalien und natürlichen Pflanzeninhaltsstoffen werden sowohl in der Fachwelt als auch in der Öffentlichkeit kontroverse Diskussionen geführt. Weltweit sind umfangreiche Forschungsaktivitäten und -förderprogramme zur Lösung der vielen noch offenen Fragen zu verzeichnen. Obwohl der gegenwärtige Stand der Kenntnis noch keine abschließende Bewertung erlaubt, zeichnet sich doch ab, daß die Bedeutung endokrin wirksamer Umweltschadstoffe für die menschliche Gesundheit aus zwei Gründen eher gering ist. Sowohl die Wirkungsstärke als auch die Konzentration der Stoffe ist um Größenordnungen niedriger als z. B. die der körpereigenen Östrogene. Dagegen können Auswirkungen auf die Umwelt unter bestimmten Voraussetzungen durchaus ernste Folgen haben. Auch die in der menschlichen Nahrung enthaltenen Phytoöstrogene zeigen zwar eine sehr viel geringere Wirkungsintensität, sie können jedoch, verglichen mit den Umweltchemikalien, in Abhängigkeit von den Ernährungsgewohnheiten in erheblich größeren Mengen aufgenommen werden. Um die Ursachen für die möglicherweise verminderten Spermienzahlen und die erhöhten Hoden- und Brustkrebsraten zu klären, sind sorgfältig durchgeführte epidemiologische Studien erforderlich. Daneben sind weitere Studien zum Mechanismus der hormonellen Wirkungen sicher aufschlußreich, prioritär sind jedoch quantitative Aspekte, d. h. die Erfassung der biologischen Wirkstärke der verschiedenen Stoffe im Vergleich zu den körpereigenen Hormonen und den im Menschen gefundenen Mengen dieser Stoffe.

Environmental hormon-like acting substances—Introduction and state of knowledge

Summary

The hormone-like activity of environmental chemicals and natural plant constituents has evoked a controversial debate in both the public and the scientific community. Considerable research activities and sponsored programmes are being conducted world-wide to resolve the multitude of yet unanswered questions. Although the present state of knowledge does not permit a final evaluation, the available data suggests that endocrine-disrupting xenobiotics are only of minor significance to human health for two reasons. Both potency and concentration are by several orders of magnitude lower than e. g. endogenous hormone levels. However, the impact on the environment may in certain cases have grave consequences. Compared to environmental chemicals, phytoestrogens are food ingredients exhibiting a similarly low activity but which may be taken up at much higher levels, depending on individual eating habits. Carefully designed and conducted epidemiological studies are required to clarify the cause of the apparent reduction of sperm numbers and of the increases in testicular and mammary cancer incidences. Additional studies that shed light on the mechanism of hormonal effects would certainly be informative. However priority should be given to quantitative aspects, e. g. determination of the biological potency of the different compounds in comparison to endogenous hormones, as well as internal exposure to these compounds in humans.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  1. [1]
    Colborn, T., Dumanoski D., und Myers, J. P.: Die bedrohte Zukunft. Gefährden wir unsere Fruchtbarkeit und Überlebensfähigkeit? München: Droemer Knaur 1996.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Carlsen, E., Giwercman, A., Keiding, N., and Skakkebaek, N. E.: Evidence for decreasing quality of semen during past 50 years. Brit Med J305 (1992) 609–613.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    Sharpe, R. M., and Skakkebaek, N. E.: Are oestrogens involved in falling sperm counts and disorders of the male reproductive tract? Lancet341 (1993) 1392–1395.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Colborn, T., vom Saal, F. S., and Soto, A. M.: Developmental effects of endocrine-disrupting chemicals in wildlife and humans. Environ Health Persp101 (1993) 378–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    ECETOC: Environmental Oestrogens: A compendium of test methods. ECETOC Document No. 33 (1996), Brussels.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Schäfer, W. R., Zahradnik, H. P., Fijus-Plessner, N., und Schneider, K.: Anthropogene Substanzen mit unerwünschter Östrogenwirkung. Umweltmed1 (1996) 35–42.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Eisenbrand, G. (ed.): Hormonally active agents in food. Symposium organized by the DFG-Senate Commission on the Evaluation of Food Safety. Weinheim: VCH-Wiley 1998.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Sonnenschein, C., Soto, A. M., Fernandez, M. F., Olea, N., Olea-Serrano, M. F., and Ruiz-Lopez, M. D.: Development of a marker of estrogenic exposure in human serum. Clin Chem41 (1995) 1888–1895.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Safe, S. H.: Environmental and dietary estrogens and human health: Is there a problem? Environ Health Persp103 (1995) 346–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Arnold, S. F., Klotz, D. M., Collins, B. M., Vonier, P. M., Guilette, J. R., and McLachlan, J. A.: Synergistic activation of estrogen receptor with combinations of environmental chemicals. Science272 (1996) 1489–1492.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Gaido, K. W., McDonnell, D. P., Korach, K. S., and Safe, S. H.: Estrogen activity of chemical mixtures: Is there synergism? CIIT Activities17 (1997) 1–7.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    McLachlan, J. A.: Synergistic Effect of Environmental Estrogens: Report Withdrawn. Science277 (1997) 462–463.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    Bujan, L., Mansat, A., Pontonnier, F., and Mieusset, R.: Time series analysis of sperm concentration in fertile men in Toulouse, France, between 1977–1992, Brit Med J312 (1996) 471–472.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    Mc Leod, J., and Wang, Y.: Male fertility potential in terms of semen quality: a review of the past, a study of the present. Fertil Steril31 (1979) 103–116.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Paulsen, C. A., Berman, N. G., and Wang, C.: Data from men in greater Seattle reveals no downward trend in semen in quality: further evidence that deterioration of semen quality is not geographically uniform. Fertil Steril65 (1996) 1015–1020.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Fisch, H., Goluboff, E. T., Olson, J. H., Feldshuh, J., Broder, S. S., and Barad, D. H.: Semen analyses in 1283 men from the United States over a 25-year period: no decline in quality. Fertil Steril65 (1996) 1009–1014.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    Suominen, J., and Vierula, M.: Semen quality of Finnish men. Br Med J306 (1993) 1579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    Auger, J., Kunstman, J. M., Czyglik, F., and Jouannet, P.: Decline in semen quality among fertile men in Paris during the past 20 years. N Engl J Med332 (1995) 281–285.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    Bostofte, E., Serup, J., and Rebbe, H.: Has the fertility of Danish men declined through the years in terms of semen quality? A comparison of semen qualities between 1952 and 1972. Int J Fertil28 (1983) 91–95.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    Irvine, S., Cawood, E., Richardson, D., Mac-Donald, E., and Aitken, J.: Evidence for deteriorating semen quality in the United Kingdom: birth cohort study in 577 men in Scotland over 11 years. Brit Med J312 (1996) 467–471.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    Nelson, C. M. K., and Bunge, R. G.: Semen analysis: evidence for changing parameters of male fertility potential. Fertil Steril25 (1974) 503–507.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    Van Waeleghem, K., De Clercq, N., Vermeulen, L., Schoonjans, F., and Comhaire, F.: Deterioration of sperm quality in young Belgian men during recent decades. Hum Reprod9, Suppl 4 (1994) 73.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    Lerchl, A., und Nieschlag, E.: Gibt es eine Spermienkrise? Deutsches Ärzteblatt93 (1996) A 2465–2468.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    Forman, D., and Møller, H.: Testicular Cancer. Cancer Surv19/20 (1994) 323–341.Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    Jensen, T. K., Toppari, J., Keiding, N., and Skakkebaek, N. E.: Do environmental estrogens contribute to the decline in male reproductive health? Clin Chem41 (1995) 1896–1901.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. [26]
    Mussalo-Rauhamaa, H., Häsänen, E., Pyysalo, H., Antervo, K., Kauppila, R., and Pantzar, P.: Occurrence of beta-hexachlorocyclohexane in breast cancer patients. Cancer66 (1990) 2124–2128.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. [27]
    Wolff, M. S., Toniolo, P. G., Lee, E. W., Rivera, M., and Dubin, N.: Blood levels of organochlorine residues and risk of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst85 (1993) 648–652.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. [28]
    Falck, F., Ricci, A., Wolff, M. S., Godbold, J., and Deckers, P.: Pesticides and polychlorinated biphenyl residues in human breast lipids and their relation to breast cancer. Arch Environ Health47 (1992) 143–146.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. [29]
    Dewailly, E., Dodin, S., Verreault, R., Avotte, P., Sauve, I., Morin, J., and Brisson, J.: High organochlorine body burden in women with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst86 (1994) 232–234.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. [30]
    Krieger, N., Wolff, M. S., Hiatt, R. A., Rivera, M., Vogelman, J., and Orentreich, N.: Breast cancer and serum organochlorines: a prospective study among white, black and Asian women. J Natl Cancer Inst86 (1994) 589–599.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. [31]
    Unger, M., Kiaer, H., Blickert-Toft, M., Olsen, J., and Clausen, J.: Organochlorine compounds in human breast fat from deceased with and without breast cancer and in biopsy material from newly diagnosed patients undergoing breast surgery. Environ Res34 (1984) 24–28.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. Greim
    • 1
  1. 1.Gesellschaft Deutscher Chemiker Beratergremium für Altstoffe (BUA-Büro München)GSF-Institut für Toxikologie, NeuherbergOber-schleißheim

Personalised recommendations