The Open Urology & Nephrology Journal




ISSN: 1874-303X ― Volume 12, 2019

LETTER TO THE EDITOR



Susanna Bohme*


Article Information


Identifiers and Pagination:

Year: 2015
Volume: 8
First Page: 56
Last Page: 57
Publisher Id: TOUNJ-8-56
DOI: 10.2174/1874303X01508010056

Article History:

Received Date: 15/12/2014
Revision Received Date: 2/3/2015
Acceptance Date: 8/4/2015
Electronic publication date: 26/6/2015
Collection year: 2015

Article Metrics:

CrossRef Citations:
0

Total Statistics:

Full-Text HTML Views: 722
Abstract HTML Views: 640
PDF Downloads: 239
ePub Downloads: 154
Total Views/Downloads: 1755

Unique Statistics:

Full-Text HTML Views: 440
Abstract HTML Views: 360
PDF Downloads: 148
ePub Downloads: 109
Total Views/Downloads: 1057
Geographical View

© Susanna Bohme; Licensee Bentham Open.

open-access license: This is an open access article licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted, non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the work is properly cited.


* Corporate Accountability International, USA E-mail: sbohme@stopcorporateabuse.org




DEAR EDITOR,

I believe that Hwang et al. review of the gonadotoxic effects of DBCP [1Hwang K, Eisenberg ML, Walters RC, Lipshultz LI. Gonadotoxic effects of DBCP a historical review and current concepts Open Urol Nephrol J 2013; 6: 26-30.] mischaracterized both the science and history of dibromochloropropane’s hazards in an agricultural setting.

There is little debate that DBCP is gonadotoxic in men. However, Hwang et al.’s interpretation of studies of exposed agricultural workers suggests that exposures in this population pose no important risk. The authors fail to adequately report the findings of the studies they consider, and omit other important scientific information.

Hwang et al. discuss Glass et al.’s 1979 publication [2Glass RI, Lyness RN, Mengle DC, Powell KE, Kahn E. Sperm count depression in pesticide applicators exposed to dibromochlo-ropropane Am J Epidemiol 1979; 109(3): 346-51.]. This study found sperm count depression among “applicators involved in irrigation setup work and in the calibration of equipment”, and concluded that “the testicular toxicity of DBCP…may occur in a shorter period that was previously reported, [and]….may be reversible in men with mild sperm count depression”. Hwang et al. focus on Glass et al. characterization of depressed sperm counts as “clinically unimportant”. However, this assertion is based on the categorization of four DBCP-exposed men with sperm counts below 106 as fertile who, according to the authors, “might have been infertile had they desired more children.” Clinical infertility rates, therefore, reflect both the physical effects of the chemical and the social realities of the population studied. Given the diversity of DBCP-exposed populations, one cohort’s desire for children can tell us little about the social impact of DBCP-induced sperm count depression in other groups of workers.

More concerning is Hwang et al. mischaracterization of Sandifer et al. study of “Spermatogenesis in Agricultural Workers Exposed to Dibromochloropropane” [3Sandifer SH, Wilkins RT, Loadholt CB, Lane LG, Eldridge JC. Spermatogenesis in agricultural workers exposed to dibromochlo-ropropane (DBCP) Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 1979; 23(4-5): 703-10.]. Sandifer found a “significant negative correlation…between sperm count and DBCP use-index”, and the authors stated the result as “quite consistent with an occurrence of primary disruption of spermatogenesis at the testicular level for all users who had extensive exposure to the compound”. Hwang et al. neglected to mention these findings, presenting instead some Sandifer data points without p-values or mention of significance. Hwang authors do stress that Sandifer “found no persons who desired more children but were ‘infertile’, suggesting that there was no effect on clinical fertility”. This selective interpretation again downplays the physical impact of DBCP by stressing its social impact in one particular group of workers.

Finally, Hwang et al. discuss Ramírez and Ramírez’s 1980 publication, “Male sterility caused by exposure of workers to the nematacide 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane” [4Ramírez R, Ana L, Ramírez M, Carlos M. Esterilidad masculina causado por la exposicion laboral al nematicida 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane Acta Medica Costarric 1980; 23(2): 219-2.]. They note that Ramírez and Ramírez “found a negative correlation between exposure to DBCP and sperm counts”, but fail to discuss the data in detail. Ramírez found a significant increase in sperm count depression (107 spermatozoids/ml; p<0.01) and azoospermia (p<0.05) with hours of exposure; but no statistically significant relationship between oligospermia and hours of exposure (p<0.3). Hwang et al. avoid any nuanced discussion of these findings, focusing instead on the limits of the study, sometimes making errors of interpretation or omission. For example, Hwang et al. suggest that Ramírez and Ramirez included no information on the age of study participants, but the article states that all participants were aged between 21-44 years. Hwang et al. also suggest Ramírez and Ramírez’s exclusion of men with other likely causes of sterility--including those with a gonorrhea diagnosis—weakened the study, when in fact it made it stronger by eliminating possible confounders. In addition, the reviewers gratuitously and without citation imply that high marijuana use among this group of workers may account for the azoospermia and sperm count depression. Ramírez and Ramírez ’s results are consistent with other studies' findings that sperm counts decrease with DBCP exposure. Considered together, these studies amply demonstrate that DBCP exposure can affect farmworkers in the same way as it affects industrial workers.

Hwang et al. fail to include some material that further demonstrates the risk DBCP posed to farmworkers [5Bohme SR. Toxic injustice a transnational history of exposure and struggle Oakland California University of California Press 2014; p: 360.]. In 1978, the US EPA concluded there was a clear and dose- dependent relationship between DBCP exposure and depressed sperm counts in these workers, and that DBCP also posed an alarming cancer risk to farmworkers, especially through dermal contact. Ample evidence from corporate documents also shows that Dow and Shell, the first DBCP producers, were concerned with agricultural exposures early on. In 1958, Dow had determined that DBCP application through a sprinkler irrigation system could cause air concentrations at about half the levels found to cause serious health effects in lab animals, and also posed an important risk of skin contact. In 1960, Dow advised Florida officials against the overhead sprinkler application of DBCP to protect workers from health hazards. The same year, Shell found exposures among citrus grove applicators to range from 0.83 ppm to 3.31 ppm, up to more than three times higher than the 1ppm level suggested by Torkelson. In 1963, tests from Hawaiian pineapple fields showed air concentrations ranging between 6.2 and 11.0 ppm [5Bohme SR. Toxic injustice a transnational history of exposure and struggle Oakland California University of California Press 2014; p: 360.].

Dow and Shell’s backpedalling on DBCP toxicity, protections and warnings came in tandem with increasingly strict regulation on nematicides, which prior to 1961 had not fallen under the Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act. When regulators became concerned about the human health effect suggested by animal testing, Dow and Shell worked together to convince regulators that DBCP could be safely formulated and used. They claimed that because there had been no adverse reports of human health problems with DBCP, the health effects noted in experimental animals were not generalizable to humans. However, there is no evidence that Shell or Dow tested workers’ sperm counts or reproductive outcomes while making claims to a history of safe use [5Bohme SR. Toxic injustice a transnational history of exposure and struggle Oakland California University of California Press 2014; p: 360.].

It is not, as Hwang et al. claim, “startling” that the problems originally found in animals were eventually evident in humans. The entire premise of toxicology is that animal results presage human health harms. Hwang et al. imply that Torkelson’s admittedly “arbitrary” concentration limit reflected an understanding of “species specificity and the comparatively low impact of DBCP on human DNA” [1Hwang K, Eisenberg ML, Walters RC, Lipshultz LI. Gonadotoxic effects of DBCP a historical review and current concepts Open Urol Nephrol J 2013; 6: 26-30.]. However, the studies they cite on these topics were not published until decades after Torkelson settled on his number. In fact, toxicological testing conducted by the two chemical companies showed similar effects across a number of animal species including monkeys, rats, guinea pigs and rabbits [5Bohme SR. Toxic injustice a transnational history of exposure and struggle Oakland California University of California Press 2014; p: 360.].

For each study they consider, Hwang et al. seem to emphasize the findings or limitations that suggest DBCP does not cause statistically significant gonadotoxic effects in agricultural workers. Is there an underlying agenda here? Usually a conflict of interest disclosure will help readers make their own determination about authorial intent and motivation. In this case, the conflict of interest statement claims “The authors confirm that this article content has no conflict of interest”. Unmentioned is that at least one of the authors (Larry Lipshultz) has served as a highly-paid expert witness for the defense in litigation involving agricultural workers with DBCP sterility claims. This oversight appears to violate journal policy that “Financial contributions to the work being reported should be clearly acknowledged, as should any potential conflict of interest”. Open Urology & Nephrology editors should publish a correction with a full and detailed disclosure of conflict of interest, or retract this flawed review.

Susanna Bohme

Corporate Accountability International, USA

E-mail: sbohme@stopcorporateabuse.org

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The author performed some paid consulting work for attorneys representing farmworkers with DBCP claims, over five years ago. Currently, she is listed as an expert witness in at least one DBCP case.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Declared none.

REFERENCES

[1] Hwang K, Eisenberg ML, Walters RC, Lipshultz LI. Gonadotoxic effects of DBCP a historical review and current concepts Open Urol Nephrol J 2013; 6: 26-30.
[2] Glass RI, Lyness RN, Mengle DC, Powell KE, Kahn E. Sperm count depression in pesticide applicators exposed to dibromochlo-ropropane Am J Epidemiol 1979; 109(3): 346-51.
[3] Sandifer SH, Wilkins RT, Loadholt CB, Lane LG, Eldridge JC. Spermatogenesis in agricultural workers exposed to dibromochlo-ropropane (DBCP) Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 1979; 23(4-5): 703-10.
[4] Ramírez R, Ana L, Ramírez M, Carlos M. Esterilidad masculina causado por la exposicion laboral al nematicida 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane Acta Medica Costarric 1980; 23(2): 219-2.
[5] Bohme SR. Toxic injustice a transnational history of exposure and struggle Oakland California University of California Press 2014; p: 360.
Society Affiliation


Endorsements



"Open access will revolutionize 21st century knowledge work and accelerate the diffusion of ideas and evidence that support just in time learning and the evolution of thinking in a number of disciplines."


Daniel Pesut
(Indiana University School of Nursing, USA)

"It is important that students and researchers from all over the world can have easy access to relevant, high-standard and timely scientific information. This is exactly what Open Access Journals provide and this is the reason why I support this endeavor."


Jacques Descotes
(Centre Antipoison-Centre de Pharmacovigilance, France)

"Publishing research articles is the key for future scientific progress. Open Access publishing is therefore of utmost importance for wider dissemination of information, and will help serving the best interest of the scientific community."


Patrice Talaga
(UCB S.A., Belgium)

"Open access journals are a novel concept in the medical literature. They offer accessible information to a wide variety of individuals, including physicians, medical students, clinical investigators, and the general public. They are an outstanding source of medical and scientific information."


Jeffrey M. Weinberg
(St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital Center, USA)

"Open access journals are extremely useful for graduate students, investigators and all other interested persons to read important scientific articles and subscribe scientific journals. Indeed, the research articles span a wide range of area and of high quality. This is specially a must for researchers belonging to institutions with limited library facility and funding to subscribe scientific journals."


Debomoy K. Lahiri
(Indiana University School of Medicine, USA)

"Open access journals represent a major break-through in publishing. They provide easy access to the latest research on a wide variety of issues. Relevant and timely articles are made available in a fraction of the time taken by more conventional publishers. Articles are of uniformly high quality and written by the world's leading authorities."


Robert Looney
(Naval Postgraduate School, USA)

"Open access journals have transformed the way scientific data is published and disseminated: particularly, whilst ensuring a high quality standard and transparency in the editorial process, they have increased the access to the scientific literature by those researchers that have limited library support or that are working on small budgets."


Richard Reithinger
(Westat, USA)

"Not only do open access journals greatly improve the access to high quality information for scientists in the developing world, it also provides extra exposure for our papers."


J. Ferwerda
(University of Oxford, UK)

"Open Access 'Chemistry' Journals allow the dissemination of knowledge at your finger tips without paying for the scientific content."


Sean L. Kitson
(Almac Sciences, Northern Ireland)

"In principle, all scientific journals should have open access, as should be science itself. Open access journals are very helpful for students, researchers and the general public including people from institutions which do not have library or cannot afford to subscribe scientific journals. The articles are high standard and cover a wide area."


Hubert Wolterbeek
(Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands)

"The widest possible diffusion of information is critical for the advancement of science. In this perspective, open access journals are instrumental in fostering researches and achievements."


Alessandro Laviano
(Sapienza - University of Rome, Italy)

"Open access journals are very useful for all scientists as they can have quick information in the different fields of science."


Philippe Hernigou
(Paris University, France)

"There are many scientists who can not afford the rather expensive subscriptions to scientific journals. Open access journals offer a good alternative for free access to good quality scientific information."


Fidel Toldrá
(Instituto de Agroquimica y Tecnologia de Alimentos, Spain)

"Open access journals have become a fundamental tool for students, researchers, patients and the general public. Many people from institutions which do not have library or cannot afford to subscribe scientific journals benefit of them on a daily basis. The articles are among the best and cover most scientific areas."


M. Bendandi
(University Clinic of Navarre, Spain)

"These journals provide researchers with a platform for rapid, open access scientific communication. The articles are of high quality and broad scope."


Peter Chiba
(University of Vienna, Austria)

"Open access journals are probably one of the most important contributions to promote and diffuse science worldwide."


Jaime Sampaio
(University of Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, Portugal)

"Open access journals make up a new and rather revolutionary way to scientific publication. This option opens several quite interesting possibilities to disseminate openly and freely new knowledge and even to facilitate interpersonal communication among scientists."


Eduardo A. Castro
(INIFTA, Argentina)

"Open access journals are freely available online throughout the world, for you to read, download, copy, distribute, and use. The articles published in the open access journals are high quality and cover a wide range of fields."


Kenji Hashimoto
(Chiba University, Japan)

"Open Access journals offer an innovative and efficient way of publication for academics and professionals in a wide range of disciplines. The papers published are of high quality after rigorous peer review and they are Indexed in: major international databases. I read Open Access journals to keep abreast of the recent development in my field of study."


Daniel Shek
(Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong)

"It is a modern trend for publishers to establish open access journals. Researchers, faculty members, and students will be greatly benefited by the new journals of Bentham Science Publishers Ltd. in this category."


Jih Ru Hwu
(National Central University, Taiwan)


Browse Contents



Webmaster Contact: info@benthamopen.net
Copyright © 2019 Bentham Open