Endocrine disruption by dietary phyto-oestrogens: impact on dimorphic sexual systems and behaviours

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

A wide range of health benefits have been ascribed to soya intake including a lowered risk of osteoporosis, heart disease, breast cancer, and menopausal symptoms. Because it is a hormonally active diet, however, soya can also be endocrine disrupting, suggesting that intake has the potential to cause adverse health effects in certain circumstances, particularly when exposure occurs during development. Consequently, the question of whether or not soya phyto-oestrogens are beneficial or harmful to human health is neither straightforward nor universally applicable to all groups. Possible benefits and risks depend on age, health status, and even the presence or absence of specific gut microflora. As global consumption increases, greater awareness and consideration of the endocrine-disrupting properties of soya by nutrition specialists and other health practitioners is needed. Consumption by infants and small children is of particular concern because their hormone-sensitive organs, including the brain and reproductive system, are still undergoing sexual differentiation and maturation. Thus, their susceptibility to the endocrine-disrupting activities of soya phyto-oestrogens may be especially high. As oestrogen receptor partial agonists with molecular and cellular properties similar to anthropogenic endocrine disruptors such as bisphenol A, the soya phyto-oestrogens provide an interesting model for how attitudes about what is ‘synthetic’ v. what is ‘natural,’ shapes understanding and perception of what it means for a compound to be endocrine disrupting and/or potentially harmful. This review describes the endocrine-disrupting properties of soya phyto-oestrogens with a focus on neuroendocrine development and behaviour.

Related collections

Most cited references 197

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Interaction of estrogenic chemicals and phytoestrogens with estrogen receptor beta.

G G Kuiper, J G Lemmen, B. Carlsson … (1998)

The rat, mouse and human estrogen receptor (ER) exists as two subtypes, ER alpha and ER beta, which differ in the C-terminal ligand-binding domain and in the N-terminal transactivation domain. In this study, we investigated the estrogenic activity of environmental chemicals and phytoestrogens in competition binding assays with ER alpha or ER beta protein, and in a transient gene expression assay using cells in which an acute estrogenic response is created by cotransfecting cultures with recombinant human ER alpha or ER beta complementary DNA (cDNA) in the presence of an estrogen-dependent reporter plasmid. Saturation ligand-binding analysis of human ER alpha and ER beta protein revealed a single binding component for [3H]-17beta-estradiol (E2) with high affinity [dissociation constant (Kd) = 0.05 - 0.1 nM]. All environmental estrogenic chemicals [polychlorinated hydroxybiphenyls, dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) and derivatives, alkylphenols, bisphenol A, methoxychlor and chlordecone] compete with E2 for binding to both ER subtypes with a similar preference and degree. In most instances the relative binding affinities (RBA) are at least 1000-fold lower than that of E2. Some phytoestrogens such as coumestrol, genistein, apigenin, naringenin, and kaempferol compete stronger with E2 for binding to ER beta than to ER alpha. Estrogenic chemicals, as for instance nonylphenol, bisphenol A, o, p'-DDT and 2',4',6'-trichloro-4-biphenylol stimulate the transcriptional activity of ER alpha and ER beta at concentrations of 100-1000 nM. Phytoestrogens, including genistein, coumestrol and zearalenone stimulate the transcriptional activity of both ER subtypes at concentrations of 1-10 nM. The ranking of the estrogenic potency of phytoestrogens for both ER subtypes in the transactivation assay is different; that is, E2 > zearalenone = coumestrol > genistein > daidzein > apigenin = phloretin > biochanin A = kaempferol = naringenin > formononetin = ipriflavone = quercetin = chrysin for ER alpha and E2 > genistein = coumestrol > zearalenone > daidzein > biochanin A = apigenin = kaempferol = naringenin > phloretin = quercetin = ipriflavone = formononetin = chrysin for ER beta. Antiestrogenic activity of the phytoestrogens could not be detected, except for zearalenone which is a full agonist for ER alpha and a mixed agonist-antagonist for ER beta. In summary, while the estrogenic potency of industrial-derived estrogenic chemicals is very limited, the estrogenic potency of phytoestrogens is significant, especially for ER beta, and they may trigger many of the biological responses that are evoked by the physiological estrogens.

0 comments Cited 533 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Endocrine-disrupting chemicals: an Endocrine Society scientific statement.

Evanthia Diamanti-Kandarakis, Jean-Pierre Bourguignon, Linda C Giudice … (2009)

There is growing interest in the possible health threat posed by endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs), which are substances in our environment, food, and consumer products that interfere with hormone biosynthesis, metabolism, or action resulting in a deviation from normal homeostatic control or reproduction. In this first Scientific Statement of The Endocrine Society, we present the evidence that endocrine disruptors have effects on male and female reproduction, breast development and cancer, prostate cancer, neuroendocrinology, thyroid, metabolism and obesity, and cardiovascular endocrinology. Results from animal models, human clinical observations, and epidemiological studies converge to implicate EDCs as a significant concern to public health. The mechanisms of EDCs involve divergent pathways including (but not limited to) estrogenic, antiandrogenic, thyroid, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma, retinoid, and actions through other nuclear receptors; steroidogenic enzymes; neurotransmitter receptors and systems; and many other pathways that are highly conserved in wildlife and humans, and which can be modeled in laboratory in vitro and in vivo models. Furthermore, EDCs represent a broad class of molecules such as organochlorinated pesticides and industrial chemicals, plastics and plasticizers, fuels, and many other chemicals that are present in the environment or are in widespread use. We make a number of recommendations to increase understanding of effects of EDCs, including enhancing increased basic and clinical research, invoking the precautionary principle, and advocating involvement of individual and scientific society stakeholders in communicating and implementing changes in public policy and awareness.

0 comments Cited 464 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

EDC-2: The Endocrine Society's Second Scientific Statement on Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals.

A Gore, V A Chappell, S Fenton … (2015)

The Endocrine Society's first Scientific Statement in 2009 provided a wake-up call to the scientific community about how environmental endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) affect health and disease. Five years later, a substantially larger body of literature has solidified our understanding of plausible mechanisms underlying EDC actions and how exposures in animals and humans-especially during development-may lay the foundations for disease later in life. At this point in history, we have much stronger knowledge about how EDCs alter gene-environment interactions via physiological, cellular, molecular, and epigenetic changes, thereby producing effects in exposed individuals as well as their descendants. Causal links between exposure and manifestation of disease are substantiated by experimental animal models and are consistent with correlative epidemiological data in humans. There are several caveats because differences in how experimental animal work is conducted can lead to difficulties in drawing broad conclusions, and we must continue to be cautious about inferring causality in humans. In this second Scientific Statement, we reviewed the literature on a subset of topics for which the translational evidence is strongest: 1) obesity and diabetes; 2) female reproduction; 3) male reproduction; 4) hormone-sensitive cancers in females; 5) prostate; 6) thyroid; and 7) neurodevelopment and neuroendocrine systems. Our inclusion criteria for studies were those conducted predominantly in the past 5 years deemed to be of high quality based on appropriate negative and positive control groups or populations, adequate sample size and experimental design, and mammalian animal studies with exposure levels in a range that was relevant to humans. We also focused on studies using the developmental origins of health and disease model. No report was excluded based on a positive or negative effect of the EDC exposure. The bulk of the results across the board strengthen the evidence for endocrine health-related actions of EDCs. Based on this much more complete understanding of the endocrine principles by which EDCs act, including nonmonotonic dose-responses, low-dose effects, and developmental vulnerability, these findings can be much better translated to human health. Armed with this information, researchers, physicians, and other healthcare providers can guide regulators and policymakers as they make responsible decisions.