Cited by 334Effects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicalsPesticide Exposure and ToxicityPharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental Impacts

Personal care products and endocrine disruption: A critical review of the literature

Witorsch, Raphael J., Thomas, John A.·2010·Critical Reviews in Toxicology

Abstract

This article reviews laboratory and epidemiological research into the endocrine disruptive effects of components of personal care products, namely, phthalate esters, parabens, ultraviolet (UV) filters, polycyclic musks, and antimicrobials. High doses of phthalates in utero can produce “phthalate syndrome,” demasculinizing effects in male rat offspring due to impaired testosterone production by fetal testes. However, evidence linking phthalate exposure to similar effects in humans appears inconclusive. Furthermore, phthalate exposure derived from personal care products is within safe limits and its principal bioavailable phthalate, diethyl phthalate (DEP), does not produce “phthalate syndrome.” Parabens exhibit very weak estrogen activity in vitro and in vivo, but evidence of paraben-induced developmental and reproductive toxicity in vivo lacks consistency and physiological coherence. Evidence attempting to link paraben exposure with human breast cancer is nonexistent. Select UV filters at high doses produce estrogenic, antithyroid, and other effects in rats in vivo. Again, no evidence links UV filter exposure to endocrine disruptive effects in humans. Some polycyclic musks weakly bind to estrogen, androgen, or progestin receptors and exhibit primarily antagonistic activity in vitro, which for the most part, has yet to be confirmed in vivo in mammals. The antimicrobials triclocarban and triclosan evoke weak responses mediated by aryl hydrocarbon, estrogen, and androgen receptors in vitro, which require confirmation in vivo. Preliminary observations suggest a novel interaction between triclocarban and testosterone. In conclusion, although select constituents exhibit interactions with the endocrine system in the laboratory, the evidence linking personal care products to endocrine disruptive effects in humans is for the most part lacking.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3109/10408444.2010.515563

Cites

122 of 122 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Witorsch et al. (2010) reported negative impact of some classes of compounds, including UV filters that crossed skin layers.

    “Witorsch et al. (2010) referred the negative impact of some classes of compounds, including UV filters that crossed the skin layers; nevertheless, this study highlighted that serum and reproductive hormones levels were not affected by this exposure [70].”

    From UV Filters: Challenges and Prospects (2022) · cites this paper as [70]

  • Serum and reproductive hormone levels were not affected by exposure to UV filters that crossed skin layers.

    “Witorsch et al. (2010) referred the negative impact of some classes of compounds, including UV filters that crossed the skin layers; nevertheless, this study highlighted that serum and reproductive hormones levels were not affected by this exposure [70].”

    From UV Filters: Challenges and Prospects (2022) · cites this paper as [70]

  • Several studies have concluded that there is no causal relationship between parabens and breast cancer.

    “Several studies have concluded that there is no causal relationship between parabens and breast cancer13”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 123 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Witorsch, R. J., & Thomas, J. A.
Affiliations
  • Virginia Commonwealth University (US)
  • Indiana University School of Medicine (US)
Corresponding author
Witorsch, Raphael J.
Venue
Critical Reviews in Toxicology
Published
2010-10-11
Volume
40
Issue
sup3
Pages
1-30
ISSN
  • 0045-6446 (ISSN-L)
  • 1040-8444
  • 1547-6898
OpenAlex
W2154786792
Cited by
334
References
123
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 38 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 19
FWCI
1.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Critical Reviews in Toxicology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Effects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Pesticide Exposure and Toxicity
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Pharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental Impacts
Keywords
endocrine disruption, personal care products, phthalates, parabens, UV filters, polycyclic musks, antimicrobial agents, triclocarban, triclosan, diethyl phthalate, breast cancer, reproductive toxicity, developmental toxicity, estrogenic activity, androgen receptor, aryl hydrocarbon receptor, progestin receptor, human exposure
MeSH terms
Animals, Breast Neoplasms, Carbanilides, Cosmetics, Estrogens, Female, Humans, Male, Parabens, Phthalic Acids, Receptors, Androgen, Triclosan, Ultraviolet Rays, Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast, Receptors, Aryl Hydrocarbon, Rats, Endocrine Disruptors

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review