China 
Africa 
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Percutaneous Absorption
Published in Rhoda G. M. Wang, James B. Knaak, Howard I. Maibach, Health Risk Assessment, 2017
Ronald C. Wester, Howard I. Maibach
The most commonly used in vitro technique involves placing a piece of excised skin in a diffusion chamber, applying radioactive compound to one side of the skin, and then assaying for radioactivity in the collection vessel on the other side.2 Excised human or animal skin may be used, and the skin can be wholly intact or separated into epidermis or dermis. Artificial membranes can be used in place of skin to measure diffusion kinetics. The advantages of the standard in vitro technique are that the method is easy to use and the results are obtained quickly. The disadvantage is that the fluid in the collection bath which bathes the skin is saline, which may be appropriate for studying hydrophilic compounds, but is not suitable for hydrophobic compounds. Table 4 shows that absorption of triclocarban in a standard static system in vitro was 0.12 ± 0.05% of applied dose through human adult abdominal skin. In contrast, in vivo, in man the absorption was 7.0 ± 2.8%. The discrepancy appeared to be due primarily to the insolubility of triclocarban in the small volume of saline used in the reservoir of the static system. By changing to a continuous flow system, in which the volume of saline was greatly increased, the solubility of triclocarban was no longer the limiting factor in absorption and the extent of absorption in vitro approached that of absorption in vivo.3
Benzalkonium chloride: A systematic review of its environmental entry through wastewater treatment, potential impact, and mitigation strategies
Published in Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology, 2022
Olivia Williams Barber, Erica M. Hartmann
Recently, certain biocidal chemicals including triclosan and triclocarban were banned from consumer antiseptic washes by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) due to limited evidence of benefit to consumers as well as concerns about detrimental effects on human and environmental health including antimicrobial resistance (U.S. Food & Drug Administration, 2016). Since the 2016 ban was implemented, antiseptic washes continue to be marketed, but with BAC as a main replacement for banned biocidal chemicals (Sreevidya et al., 2018). Although BAC was included in the FDA’s review, requests were made to delay a final decision to allow safety and efficacy concerns to be addressed. A similar deferral for BAC was also granted in a ban by the FDA of antimicrobials from consumer antiseptic rubs such as hand sanitizer (U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 2019). Both the FDA and EPA regulate biocides like BAC. The FDA specifically examines the safety and efficacy of these chemicals in personal care products, while the EPA has a broader focus on environmental impacts (Merchel Piovesan Pereira & Tagkopoulos, 2019). Thus, the FDA ban does not impact the use of these chemicals in other consumer goods, like cosmetics, cleaning products, or building materials, which also impact human and environmental health. Public health crises, such as the emergence of COVID-19, serve to increase the rate of human exposure and demand for disinfectants (Seyedeh Maryam et al., 2020; Zheng et al., 2020).
Age, gender, and racial/ethnic differences in the association of triclocarban with adulthood obesity using NHANES 2013–2016
Published in Archives of Environmental & Occupational Health, 2020
Uloma Igara Uche, Christopher C. King
The etiology of adulthood obesity is multifaceted. While there is substantial evidence of its association with diet, lack of physical activities, and genetic susceptibility, current evidence suggests associations with some environmental factors.8,9 Animal studies have demonstrated environmental agents can disrupt the endocrine system and/or metabolic pathways possibly increasing the risk of obesity. Environmental factors such as bisphenol A, phthalates, and metals have been linked to obesity because of their endocrine disrupting capabilities,10–23 yet there are many other environmental factors to be evaluated. Triclocarban, also known as 3-(4-Chlorophenyl)-1-(3,4-dichlorophenyl)urea or trichlorocarbanilide, is a broad-based biocide with activity against bacteria and fungi. It commonly serves as an antimicrobial agent in cosmetics and personal care products (PCP) such as soaps, lotions, toothpaste, and deodorants.24,25 Its use in PCP was banned by the Food and Drug Administration in September 2016 due to potential health concerns, however, evidence still indicates continuous use in the US.26,27 Significant levels of triclocarban have been detected in human urine, serum, and cord blood samples28,29 due mainly to absorption of triclocarban from PCP. It also has been detected in the environment due to its resistance to degradation in sewage treatment processes.30–32 Triclocarban persists in the environment and bioaccumulates in living organisms,33,34 with potential adverse effects. Findings from both in vivo and in vitro studies suggest triclocarban to be an endocrine disruptor and to affect estrogen and testosterone levels.35–38 In recombinant cell bioassays, Ahn et al38 found that triclocarban enhances steroid hormones to induce estrogen and androgen dependent gene expression through their interaction with receptors. Likewise, Chen et al35 found that triclocarban enhances testosterone action by interacting with androgen receptors. In addition, Huang et al39 found that triclocarban demonstrated estrogen-like activities in analyses using in vitro assays.