- Record: found
- Abstract: found
- Article: found
Actual priority of DEET and triclosan: Letter to the editor on “Emerging Organic Contaminants in Chinese Surface Water: Identification of Priority Pollutants”
Abstract
We have read an article by (Zhong et al. 2021) published in Engineering, and critical errors were observed in the calculation of human health risk quotient (RQ hum) and the prioritization scheme. Zhong and co-authors adopted acceptable daily intake (ADI) values of 0.082 μg/kg/day for DEET and 0.19 μg/kg/day for triclosan, as shown in Table S4 of the original article.These values were cited from a review by Murray et al. (2010). However, as we have addressed previously (Yoshida et al. 2021; Fujitani et al. 2022), the ADIs of DEET and triclosan were not correct. Original study byBlanset et al. (2007) derived the correct values, 100 μg/kg/day and 50 μg/kg/day for DEET and triclosan, respectively. Zhong et al. calculated predicted no effect concentrations (PNECs) and RQ values from the incorrect ADIs. Therefore, an overestimation of more than 200- to 1000-fold for RQ hum values occurred as shown in Table 1. As a result, DEET and triclosan would be no longer priotized in this assessment.
Content
Author and article information
References
Zhong Mengmeng, Wang Tielong, Zhao Wenxing, Huang Jun, Wang Bin, Blaney Lee, Bu Qingwei, Yu Gang. Emerging Organic Contaminants in Chinese Surface Water: Identification of Priority Pollutants. Engineering. Vol. 11:111–125. 2022. Elsevier BV. [Cross Ref]