To Örebro University

oru.seÖrebro University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
The Florence Statement on Triclosan and Triclocarban
Biodesign Center for Environmental Security, Arizona State University, Tempe, USA.
Green Science Policy Institute, Berkeley, USA.
Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, USA.
Environmental Working Group, Washington, USA.
Show others and affiliations
2017 (English)In: Journal of Environmental Health Perspectives, ISSN 0091-6765, E-ISSN 1552-9924, Vol. 125, no 6, article id 064501Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The Florence Statement on Triclosan and Triclocarban documents a consensus of more than 200 scientists and medical professionals on the hazards of and lack of demonstrated benefit from common uses of triclosan and triclocarban. These chemicals may be used in thousands of personal care and consumer products as well as in building materials. Based on extensive peer-reviewed research, this statement concludes that triclosan and triclocarban are environmentally persistent endocrine disruptors that bioaccumulate in and are toxic to aquatic and other organisms. Evidence of other hazards to humans and ecosystems from triclosan and triclocarban is presented along with recommendations intended to prevent future harm from triclosan, triclocarban, and antimicrobial substances with similar properties and effects. Because antimicrobials can have unintended adverse health and environmental impacts, they should only be used when they provide an evidence-based health benefit. Greater transparency is needed in product formulations, and before an antimicrobial is incorporated into a product, the long-term health and ecological impacts should be evaluated.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
National Institute of Environmental Health Science , 2017. Vol. 125, no 6, article id 064501
National Category
Environmental Sciences
Research subject
Enviromental Science
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-83791DOI: 10.1289/EHP1788ISI: 000413788400006PubMedID: 28632490Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85030245757OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-83791DiVA, id: diva2:1448245
Note

Funding Agency:

Virginia G. Piper Charitable Trust, Grant Number: LTR 05/01/12

Gojo

National Science Foundation, Grant Number: CBET 0,967,163

New York Community Trus, Grant Number: R01ES020889

Available from: 2020-06-26 Created: 2020-06-26 Last updated: 2021-02-17Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Zoeller, R. Thomas

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Zoeller, R. Thomas
In the same journal
Journal of Environmental Health Perspectives
Environmental Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 111 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf