Environmental Research 111 (2011) 329–336

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Environmental Research
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/envres

Phthalates in cosmetic and personal care products: Concentrations and

possible dermal exposure
Diane Koniecki a, Rong Wang b, Richard P. Moody b, Jiping Zhu b,n
a
Cosmetics Division, Health Canada, Ottawa, Canada
b
Exposure and Biomonitoring Division, Health Canada, Ottawa, Canada

a r t i c l e i n f o abstract

Article history: Phthalates are multifunctional chemicals that are used in a variety of consumer products including
Received 12 June 2010 cosmetic and personal care products. This study aims at determining phthalate levels in cosmetic and
Received in revised form personal care products obtained from the Canadian market. Overall 252 products including 98 baby
14 January 2011
care products were collected at retail stores in several provinces across Canada in year 2007. These
Accepted 18 January 2011
products included fragrances, hair care products (hair sprays, mousses, and gels), deodorants (including
Available online 18 February 2011
antiperspirants), nail polishes, lotions (body lotions and body creams), skin cleansers, and baby
Keywords: products (oils, lotions, shampoos and diaper creams). Samples were extracted with different organic
Phthalates solvents, depending on the types of the products, followed by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry
Cosmetic
(GC–MS) analysis. Of the 18 investigated phthalates, diethyl phthalate (DEP), dimethyl phthalate
Dermal exposure
(DMP), diisobutyl phthalate (DiBP), di-n-butyl phthalate (DnBP) and di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP)
GC/MS analysis
were detected. The detection frequencies were in the following order: DEP (103 out of 252
products) 4DnBP (15/252)4 DiBP (9/252) 4 DEHP (8/252)4 DMP (1/252). DEP was detected in almost
all types of surveyed products with the highest levels (25,542 mg/g, equal to 2.6%) found in fragrances.
DnBP was largely present in nail polish products with the highest concentration of 24,304 mg/g (2.4%).
DnBP was also found in other products such as hair sprays, hair mousses, skin cleansers and baby
shampoos at much lower concentrations (36 mg/g and less). Levels of other detected phthalates were
generally low in the products. Based on these values, daily dermal exposure dosage to five phthalates
was estimated for three age groups, female adults (60 kg); toddlers (0.5–4 years) and infants (0–6
months), through the use of cosmetic and personal care products. The exposure estimation, however,
was based on existing products use pattern data, instead of probabilistic model based population use
distribution. For female adults, the maximal daily exposure of 78 mg/kg bw/d was determined for DEP.
The maximal daily exposure was much lower for the other four phthalates (DEHP, 0.82 mg/kg bw/d;
DnBP, 0.36 mg/kg bw/d; and DMP, 0.03 mg/kg bw/d). The exposure for DiBP was not calculated due to its
very low levels (o 10 mg/g) in products. Toddlers and infants in this case had a maximal daily exposure
to DEP of 20 and 42 mg/kg bw/d, respectively.
Crown Copyright & 2011 Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Phthalates (also called phthalic acid esters) have been widely
used in modern society. Phthalates with higher molecular
weights, such as di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) (Table 1) are
principally used as additives and plasticizers in polyvinyl chloride
plastics (PVC), while those with lower molecular weights, such
as diethyl phthalate (DEP), di-n-butyl phthalate (DnBP), and
dimethyl phthalate (DMP), are employed in solvent, adhesive,
wax, ink, pharmaceutical, cosmetic and insecticide production
(Schettler, 2006). An additional plasticizer for PVC, diisobutyl
phthalate (DiBP) is used as a light-resistant plasticizer for
n
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: jiping.zhu@hc-sc.gc.ca (J. Zhu).
lacquers, latex and paste paints (B+ S Chemie, 2000), and in nail
polish.
Due to their widespread use, phthalates have been detected in
the environment (Wormuth et al., 2006), foodstuff (Benson,
2009), consumer products (Heudorf et al., 2007; Schettler,
2006), indoor and personal air (Adibi et al., 2008; Xu et al.,
2010; Destaillats et al., 2008), indoor dust (Bornehag et al.,
2005; Deutschle et al., 2008; Koralik et al., 2008; Schripp et al.,
2010), and air inside vehicles (Geiss et al., 2009). The general
population may be exposed since phthalates are ubiquitous
environmental contaminants (Wittassek and Angerer, 2008;
Hauser and Calafat, 2005). Presence of phthalates in human breast
milk was reported in Canada (Zhu et al., 2006), the United Sates
(Hines et al., 2009), Japan (Takatori et al., 2007), Denmark/Finland
(Main et al., 2006)), and Italy (Latini et al., 2009). A number of
human biomonitoring studies on the monoesters of phthalates has

0013-9351/$ - see front matter Crown Copyright & 2011 Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.envres.2011.01.013
330 D. Koniecki et al. / Environmental Research 111 (2011) 329–336
Table 1
Physical properties of phthalates that were detected in the tested products.
Chemical (CAS no.) Formula Molecular Boiling
weight point (1C)
DMP (131-11-3) C10H10O4 194.2 283.7
DEP (84-66-2) C12H14O4 222.2 295
DiBP (84-69-5) C16H22O4 278.4 296.5
DnBP (84-74-2) C16H22O4 278.4 340
DEHP (117-81-7) C24H38O4 390.6 385
Log Kow¼ logarithm of octanol–water partition coefficient. Values are from the NIOSH (2009).
highlighted the large extent of humans exposure to various phtha-
lates (Blount et al., 2000; CDC, 2005; Calafat and McKee, 2006; Koch
et al., 2005; Wittassek and Angerer, 2008). In parallel to the
measurements in urine, phthalates and their metabolites were also
detected in blood serum, saliva (Hines et al., 2009; Koch et al., 2005;
Högberg et al., 2008) and amniotic fluid (Wittassek et al., 2009).
Evidence has accumulated for the association of harmful health
effects with exposure to phthalates and their monoester metabolites
(Latini et al., 2004; Hauser and Calafat, 2005; Foster, 2006; Lyche
et al., 2009). Main health concerns relating to phthalates are based on
animal studies which showed that exposure to certain phthalates can
cause adverse health effects including effects on development of the
male reproductive system (Foster, 2006; Benson, 2009). DnBP and
DEHP have effects on germ cell development, and butylbenzyl
phthalate affects epididymal spermatozoa concentration (Foster
et al., 2000; Christiansen et al., 2008). Anti-androgenic effects of
DnBP, DEHP, DiBP, butylbenzyl phthalate and diisonyl phthalate have
been observed in fetal rats (Mylchreest et al., 1998; Grandjean and
Toppari, 2006; Borch et al., 2006; NRC, 2008). A more recent study
demonstrated dose-additive effects on testosterone reduction in the
fetal testes (Howdeshell et al., 2008). DEP and DMP, however, have
not been shown to be reproductive or developmental toxicants (Gray
et al., 2000; Benson, 2009). Human data on health effects of
phthalates are limited and often inconclusive (Hauser and Calafat,
2005; Gwinn et al., 2007; Janjua et al., 2007; Jakkola and Knight,
2008; Swan et al., 2005; Kamrin, 2009). Some evidence supports the
hypothesis that exposure to phthalates in the home environment
increases the risk of adverse effects on airways and immunologic
system (Koralik et al., 2008; Deutschle et al., 2008; Bornehag et al.,
2004, 2005). A British epidemiologic study found a link between
phthalates in the home and the development of allergy and asthma in
children, but the evidence was limited by imprecise data on levels of
exposure (Jakkola and Knight, 2008). Large amounts of specific
phthalates fed to rodents have been shown to damage their liver,
kidneys, thyroid gland tissue, and initial rodent studies indicated
hepato-carcinogenicity. However, further research indicated that the
mechanism of liver tumors is specific to rodents and led to the
conclusion that DEHP is not likely to be carcinogenic in humans.
(IARC, 2000).
Concerns over health effects of phthalates as a group, particu-
larly on reproduction, have drawn attention from both the
advocacy groups and lawmakers, especially given the fact that
phthalate exposure is ubiquitous in the general population
(Heudorf et al., 2007; Duty et al., 2005; Wormuth et al., 2006).
Policies and regulations restricting the use of phthalates have
been developed in various jurisdictions. For example, the United
States and the European Union are currently regulating several
phthalates including DEHP and DnBP in children’s products, and
similar action is underway in Canada (EC, 2009b). The European
Union has banned DnBP and DEHP for use in cosmetic and
personal care products in the European market (SCCP, 2007),
both are classified in the European Union as category 2 substances
Vapor pressure Water solubility Log Henry’s Law Constant
(mmHg at 25 1C) (mg/L at 25 1C) Kow (atm m3 /mole at 25
1C)
3.08  10  3 4000 1.6 1.07  10  7
2.1  10  3 1080 2.42 6.10  10  7
6.65  10  3 6.2 4.11 1.22  10  6
2.01  10  5 13 4.5 1.81  10  6
7.23  10  8 0.285 7.6 4.37  10  5
to reproduction (category 2 substances should be regarded as if
they impair fertility, or if they cause developmental toxicity in
humans (Rank, 2005). DEHP is currently listed on Health Canada’s
Cosmetic Ingredient Hotlist as a prohibited ingredient and should
not be used in cosmetic products (EC, 2009a). DEP is not regulated
in Canada or in any other countries.
Exposure guidance values, which are estimates of daily exposure
that are likely to be without an appreciable risk of deleterious effects,
are also being developed for certain phthalates. The available gui-
dance values for DEP, DiBP, DnBP, and DEHP derived from toxicolo-
gical studies conducted in animals administered through the oral
route are presented in Table 2, since dermal data were lacking.
Tolerable daily intake (TDI) values of 0.044 mg/kg bw/d and
0.063 mg/kg bw/d were established for DEHP and DnBP by Health
Canada, respectively (EC/EC, 1994a, 1994b). More recently, the
European Food Safety Authority (EFSA, 2005a) allocated a TDI of
0.048 mg/kg bw/d for DEHP based on reproductive effects and a TDI
of 0.01 mg/kg bw/d for DnBP for developmental toxicity in male
rodents. For DiBP, the oral reference dose (RfD) of 0.8 mg/kg bw/d
(Benson, 2009) is based on a benchmark dose level (BMDL) for
toxicity to the developing male rat reproductive system (Howdeshell
et al., 2008). The RfD of 0.8 mg/kg bw/d for DEP is deduced on a no-
observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) of 750 mg/kg bw/d for changes
in growth rate and organ weights in rats (U.S. EPA, 1993).
Only limited information on the levels of phthalates in cosmetic
and personal care products and potential human exposure through
use of these products is currently available (NRC, 2008). Koo and Lee
(2004) monitored several phthalates including DEHP, DEP and DnBP
in cosmetics purchased at retail in Korea. The sample consisted of 102
products of four categories (perfumes, deodorants, nail polishes and
hair care). A non-profit organization Environmental Working Group
found phthalates in 52 of the 72 tested off-the-shelf cosmetic and
personal care products including deodorants, fragrances, hair gels,
mousses, hair sprays, and hand and body lotions (Houlihan et al.,
2002). A study commissioned by Greenpeace (2005) reported phtha-
lates in perfumes sold on the European market. DEP was found in 35
of the 36 tested perfume products with the highest concentration of
2.23%. DMP levels were reaching 0.3%. Other phthalates were
detected, in very small quantities which led the European Commis-
sion’s Scientific Committee on Consumer Products (SCCP) to the
conclusion that they were likely present as traces or impurities
(SCCP, 2007). Whether DMP was intentionally used as an ingredient,
however, could not be concluded. Hubinger and Harvey (2006) also
reported phthalates in 48 cosmetic and personal care products for the
general population in the US market. The objective of the present
study was to conduct a national survey on the level of phthalates in
cosmetic and personal care products on the Canadian market to
document the potential levels of exposure to phthalates related to the
use of cosmetic and personal care products in Canada. A total of 18
phthalates (for target list, see Technical Appendix) were monitored in
252 cosmetic and personal care products including 98 baby care
products collected in several Canadian provinces.
 D. Koniecki et al. / Environmental Research 111 (2011) 329–336 331

Table 2
Health-based exposure guidance values for phthalates from various committees.

Chemical Critical endpoint and (reference) study Committee and POD/UFa Guidance value
year of evaluation (mg/kg bw/day)

DMP Not available

DEP NOAEL¼ 750 mg/kg bw/d for decreased growth rate, food U.S. EPA (1993) NOAEL/1000 RfD 0.8
consumption and altered organ weights in a rat subchronic
oral feeding study (U.S. EPA, 1993)
DiBP NOAEL¼ 100 mg/kg bw/d for decreased fetal testosterone BMDL/100 RfD 0.8
production in male rats (Howdeshell et al., 2008) and derived
a BMDL 1 SD of 80 mg/kg bw/d (Benson, 2009)
DnBP NOAEL¼ 30 mg/kg bw/d based on decreased fetal testosterone US EPA (2006) NOAEL/100 RfD 0.3
production (Lehmann et al., 2004)
NOAEL¼ 62.5 mg/kg bw/d based decreases in live offspring and Health Canada NOAEL/1000 TDI 0.063
increases in external defects and skeletal anomalies in mice (1994a)
(Chan and Meek, 1994)
LOAEL¼ 2 mg/kg bw/d for loss of germ cell development and EFSA (2005b) LOAEL/200 TDI 0.01
mammary gland changes in rats exposed during gestation and
lactation (Lee et al., 2004)
DEHP LOAEL¼ 19 mg/kg bw/d for increased relative liver weights in U.S. EPA (1991) LOAEL/1000 RfD 0.02
suchronic to chronic oral exposure of guinea pigs (U.S. EPA, 1991)
NOAEL¼ 44 mg/kg bw/d for increased numbers of malformed Health Canada NOAEL/1000 TDI 0.044
fetuses (Meek and Chan, 1994) (1994b)
NOAEL¼ 4.8 mg/kg bw/d for testicular and developmental EFSA (2005a) NOAEL/100 TDI 0.048
toxicity (Wolfe and Layton, 2003)
ECB (2008) NOAEL/250 TDI 0.020 for newborn 0–3
months old, women in
childbearing age
NOAEL/200 TDI 0.025 for infants 3–12
months old

TDI, tolerable daily intake; RfD, reference dose; BMDL, benchmark dose level; bw, body weight; NOAEL, no-observed-adverse-effect-level; LOAEL, lowest-observed-
adverse-effect-level.
a
POD/UF, point of departure/uncertainty factor.

Table 3
Mean recoveries (with relative standard deviation in bracket) of spiked internal standards from different types of products with their respective extraction method.

Product type Spiking DMP-d4 DnBP-d4 DEHP-d4 Extraction

level (mg/g) method

Fragrance, hair care (except hair gel), deodorant, 100 88% (20%) 99% (21%) 87% (23%) Extraction with hexane only
baby products (except shampoo and lotion)
Lotion, skin cleanser, shampoo, and hair gel 100 93% (16%) 100% (19%) Extraction with water first, then hexane
Lotion, skin cleanser, shampoo, and hair gel 100 94% (23%) Extraction with methanol first, then hexane
Nail polish 100 79% (21%) 99% (23%) 99% (10%) Extraction with acetone first, then hexane

DMP ¼dimethyl phthalate; DnBP¼ di-n-butyl phthalate; DEHP¼ di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate.

2. Experimental
2.1. Samples and chemicals
Cosmetic and personal care products were collected from
retail stores in Canada (see supplementary Technical Appendix)
between December 2007 and April 2008. All standards and
organic solvents were from commercial sources (see supple-
mentary Technical Appendix). Deionized water (18.3 mO cm)
was prepared using a Super-Q water generation system (Fisher
Scientific, Ottawa, Canada). All standard solutions and spiking
solutions were prepared in hexane.
2.2. Sample preparation
Sample preparation was similar to that described elsewhere
(Wang et al., 2009) with some minor modifications. Briefly 0.4 g of
each sample was accurately weighed into a 15 mL vial using an
analytical balance. 40 mg of three internal standards, DMP-d4, DnBP-
d4, and DEHP-d4 were spiked into each sample and spiked samples
were left standing overnight for equilibrium before solvent extraction.
Different combinations of solvents were used for extracting phtha-
lates from products of different types in order to achieve good
recoveries for phthalates (Table 3). For lotions, skin cleansers,
shampoos, and hair gels, two different solvent systems were used
in order to obtain high recoveries for both short chain (DMP and
DnBP) and long chain (DEHP) phthalates. Mechanical shaking and
centrifugation were also employed to aid the extraction process.
At the end of extraction, the upper clear organic solvent layer was
collected and diluted 10 times prior to instrumental analysis. After
the first round of analysis, some extracts were further diluted to
an appropriate concentration and re-analyzed in order to make
the instrument response signal within the linear range of the
calibration curve.
Method performance including recoveries was provided in
the supplementary Technical Appendix.
2.3. Measurement of phthalates
Phthalates were determined by gas chromatography-mass
spectrometry (GC–MS) using an Agilent gas chromatograph (Agi-
lent Technologies 6890 N Network GC System), coupled with an
Agilent mass selective detector (Agilent 5973 Network MSD).
Phthalates were separated on a DB-5 MS column (30 m  0.25 mm
I.D.  0.25 mm film thickness, J&W Scientific, Folsom, CA, USA). The
GC conditions were: injection port temperature, 280 1C; initial
332 D. Koniecki et al. / Environmental Research 111 (2011) 329–336
oven temperature, 45 1C for 5 min; initial ramp rate, 15 1C/min till
210 1C; second ramp rate, 8 1C/min to 270 1C; final ramp rate,
30 1C/min to 310 1C, and kept at 310 1C for 25 min. MSD was
operated in full scan mode. The ions used for quantifying the
phthalates were m/z 167 for DMP-d4, m/z 153 for DnBP-d4 and
DEHP-d4, m/z 163 for DMP, and m/z 149 for the remaining
phthalates. The qualification of the phthalates was based on the
related mass spectrum of each compound extracted from the
chromatograms.
2.4. Estimation parameters for dermal exposure
The exposure dosage calculation was based on the percentage
of a topically applied dose that permeates the skin. The algorithm
(Eq. (1)) involved the concentrations of phthalates in products
(C, mg/g), the amount of product applied (AF, g/use), frequency of
application (FD, time/d), retention factor (RF), percutaneous
absorption (A, %) and body weight (bw, kg).
Exposure ðmg=kg bw=dÞ ¼ Cðmg=gÞ  AFðg=useÞ  FDðtime=dÞ
RF  Að%Þ=bwðkgÞ ð1Þ
Scenarios for the use of cosmetic and personal care products
including the amounts of products use per application (AF) and the
frequency of use of products (FD) were based on data obtained from
several United States and European Union surveys (U.S. EPA, 2008;
RIVM, 2006; Wormuth et al., 2006). The retention factor (RF) is a
default value to account for rinsing off and dilution of finished
products by application to wet skin or hair (Wormuth et al., 2006;
SCCNFP, 2002). Assumptions made were that body weights of
female adolescent (20+ years), toddlers (0.5–4 years ), infants (0–6
months) were 60, 15.5 and 7.5 kg, respectively (EC, 1998). A daily
exposure dosage can be estimated using these factors and the
concentrations in the products that were determined in this study.
For the present estimation, an absorption value (A) of 5% was used
for all products except for nail polish (0.6%  2) (see the discussion
for the rationale supporting these values).
3. Results
Among the 18 monitored phthalates (see supplementary
Technical Appendix), only five were detected in the products.
They are dimethyl phthalate (DMP), diethyl phthalate (DEP),
diisobutyl phthalate (DiBP), di-n-butyl phthalate (DnBP) and
di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP). Summary results of the levels
of these five phthalates are provided in Table 4, which listed the
number of products in which at least one phthalate was detected,
the median value and maximal value of detected target phtha-
lates in all samples of a particular subtype. The detection limits of
each of these five phthalates are also provided in Table 4. Detailed
information on the levels of phthalate in each individual sample
is given in the supplementary Technical Appendix. In all, 112
samples were found to contain at least one phthalate at a
detectable level. The detection frequencies of the five phthalates
were in the following order: DEP (103 out of 252 pro-
ducts)4DnBP (15/252)4DiBP (9/252)4DEHP (8/252)4DMP
(1/252). DEP was detected in almost all types of products (except
nail polishes). High DEP levels were largely concentrated in
fragrances. Of the 23 cosmetic and personal care products that
had DEP levels greater than 1000 mg/g, 16 were fragrances, with
the highest value of 25,542 mg/g (equal to 2.6%). Although hair
care products had a similar detection frequency for DEP (70%) as
that of fragrances, the DEP levels were much lower in hair care
products with only one product having DEP level greater than
1000 mg/g. The detection frequency of DEP was 45% and 34% for
deodorants (including antiperspirants) and lotions, respectively.
Some of these products, three deodorants, one body lotion and
one body cream, contained DEP levels greater than 1000 mg/g.
DEP was detected in 33 of the 98 (34% detection frequency) baby
care products. In general, the levels of DEP in baby care products
were below 1000 mg/g except for one diaper cream.
While DEP was not detected in nail polish products, DnBP was
found in three of the 20 nail polish products at a concentration level
of 24,304, 22,947 and 3478 mg/g, respectively. Relatively high levels
of DEHP were also found in one nail polish (1045 mg/g) and two
fragrances (521 mg/g; 382 mg/g). DnBP and DEHP levels in other
products, if detected, were generally low at less than 40 mg/g. For
the other two phthalates, DiBP was detected only at levels less than
10 mg/g and DMP was found in only one (deodorant) product at
72 mg/g.
Dermal exposure from various types of cosmetic and personal
care products was estimated for three age groups of consumers:
adolescent women, toddlers and infants (Table 5). Exposure
dosage was not calculated for phthalates which were detected
at trace only (maximal value of 10 mg/g or less). The combined
maximal daily exposure dosage from use of all surveyed products
was calculated at 0.03, 78, 0.36 and 0.82 mg/kg bw/d for DMP,
DEP, DnBP and DEHP, respectively, for an adolescent woman. The
maximal daily exposure to DEP for the two age groups, babies 0–6
month old and toddlers from 0.5 to 4 years old was estimated at
42 and 20 mg/kg bw/d, respectively.
4. Discussion
4.1. Levels of phthalates in tested products
The results from this study confirmed findings of several earlier
studies (SCCP, 2007; Hubinger and Harvey, 2006; Houlihan et al.,
2002) that DEP is the most frequently used phthalate in cosmetic
and personal care products. DEP is used by industry as a fragrance
component. The relatively high concentrations in the products and
high detection frequencies of DEP in this study reflect this industry
practice. The detection frequency of DnBP in nail products in this
study (3 out of 20 products, 15%), however, was much lower than
that reported in earlier studies. The detection frequency of 67% in
nail polish products was reported by both Hubinger and Harvey
(2006) and Houlihan et al. (2002), and up to 90.5% (19/21) by Koo
and Lee (2004). DnBP has been banned for use in cosmetics includ-
ing nail polishes in the European Union since 2004, but has still
been used in nail polishes in North America. The lower DnBP
detection frequency in our study might indicate a possible gradual
phase out of DnBP from nail polish formulations for products sold
in Canada.
Although DiBP was detected in some products, the highest
level of DiBP was 4.5 mg/g. This suggests that DiBP was present as
an impurity and was not intentionally added to cosmetic and
personal care products. Out of 252 products tested, except for the
three products that contained relatively high concentration of
DEHP (521 and 382 mg/g in two fragrance products, and 1045 mg/
g in a nail polish), DEHP was only detected in trace levels, likely
being present as an impurity. This is consistent with the Govern-
ment of Canada’s proactive risk management measures which do
not permit the use of DEHP in cosmetics. DMP was only detected
in 1 of the 252 products at a concentration level of 72 mg/g.
In our analysis of 98 baby care products only DEP was
detected, except for one low level of DEHP in a baby lotion
(15 mg/g) and two low levels of DnBP (0.9 and 1.8 mg/g, respec-
tively) in baby shampoos, which were likely present as impurities.
There is no reason to believe therefore that DEHP and DnBP were
intentionally formulated in baby products.
 D. Koniecki et al. / Environmental Research 111 (2011) 329–336 333

Table 4
Phthalate concentrations (mg/g) in cosmetic and personal care products (Products that had non-detectable phthalates are not listed).

Product Type (n1) Subtype (n1) DMP DEP DiBP DnBP DEHP

Detection Limit 0.5 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.5

Fragrance (30) Fragrance (30) Detection 0 21 0 0 3
Median ND 1679 ND ND ND
Max ND 25542 ND ND 521

Hair care (24) Hair spray (11) Detection 0 8 1 2 1

Median ND 3.1 ND ND ND
Max ND 1223 1.1 36 1.6
Mousse (7) Detection 0 6 2 5 0
Median ND 19 ND 2.0 ND
Max ND 566 1.3 20 ND
Hair gel (6) Detection 0 3 0 0 0
Median ND ND ND ND ND
Max ND 445 ND ND ND

Deodorant (31) Deodorant (18) Detection 1 9 1 0 0

(excluding antiperspirant)
Median ND 3.7 ND ND ND
Max 72 3634 4.5 ND ND
Antiperspirant (13) Detection 0 5 0 0 0
Median ND ND ND ND ND
Max ND 818 ND ND ND

Nail polish (20) Nail polish (20) Detection 0 0 1 3 2

Median ND ND ND ND ND
Max ND ND 0.4 24304 1045

Lotion (29) Body lotion (20) Detection 0 7 1 0 0

Median ND ND ND ND ND
Max ND 5549 4.1 ND ND
Body cream (9) Detection 0 3 0 0 0
Median ND ND ND ND ND
Max ND 3444 ND ND ND

Skin cleanser (20) Skin cleanser (20) Detection 0 8 3.0 2 1

Median ND ND ND ND ND
Max ND 277 1.0 6.6 30

Baby product (98) Baby lotion (25) Detection 0 9 0 0 1

Median ND ND ND ND ND
Max ND 571 ND ND 15
Baby oil (19) Detection 0 5 0 0 0
Median ND ND ND ND ND
Max ND 15 ND ND ND
Diaper cream (31) Detection 0 5 0 0 0
Median ND ND ND ND ND
Max ND 2566 ND ND ND
Baby shampoo (23) Detection 0 15.0 0.0 2 0
Median ND 2.1 ND ND ND
Max ND 320 ND 1.8 ND

1–n: the total number of samples.

DMP ¼dimethyl phthalate, DEP ¼ diethyl phthalate, DiBP ¼ diisobutyl phthalate, DnBP ¼di-n-butyl phthalate, DEHP¼ di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate.

With the amendment in 2006, the Canadian Food and Drugs Act
and Cosmetic Regulations require that all ingredients be disclosed
on the label of cosmetic and personal care products. For fra-
grances, however, a generic term ‘‘parfum’’ is only required. All
products tested in this study that contained DEP levels greater
than 1000 mg/g had the generic description term as ‘‘parfum’’
listed on their labels but no specific mentioning of DEP or other
phthalates on the label. Among the three nail polish products that
contained DnBP levels greater than 1000 mg/g, two products did
list DnBP on the product label.
4.2. Possible dermal exposure through use of cosmetics and personal
products
Among various parameters in Eq. (1) for the estimation of
dermal exposure, percutaneous absorption (A, %) is a parameter
that is not easy to determine and is highly variable (Azzi et al.,
1995; Barber et al., 1992; Payan et al., 2001). Based on an in vitro
model comparison of several phthalates (DEP, DMP, DnBP, and
DEHP) (Scott et al., 1987), DEP was absorbed most extensively
with a rate comparable to that of DMP (Table 6). The absorption
through rat skin in vitro of neat DMP was 25.578.5% (Mint and
Hotchkiss, 1993) and about 35% of the applied dose at 72 h for
DEP in ethanol (Elsisi et al., 1989). However, human skin is less
permeable to phthalates, with absorption values at about 5% for
DEP, 4% for DMP and about 0.5% for DnBP from various studies
(Elsisi et al., 1989; Bronaugh et al., 1982; Scott et al., 1987; Mint
and Hotchkiss, 1993; Mint et al., 1994). For the purpose of
discussion, we used DEP % absorption through human skin (5%)
for all phthalates when calculating the daily exposure to support
the conservative approach in estimating exposure dosage (SCCP,
2007), except for nail polish products.
The information on subungual penetration rate for nail polish
products is rare. One study has reported a total subungual
penetration of 8.5% over 14 days for neat DBP (Jackson, 2008).
In the absence of other relevant information, we assumed a constant
penetration rate in this case and used a penetration of 0.6% per 24 h.
334 D. Koniecki et al. / Environmental Research 111 (2011) 329–336

Table 5
Estimation of daily dermal exposure dosage of Canadians in three different age groups to phthalates in cosmetic and personal care products.

Product type Product Frequency of Retention Exposure estimates (mg/kg bw/d)a

applied application factor
(g/use) (times/d)
DMP DEP DnBP DEHP

Max Median Max Max Max

Fragrance 0.61 3 1 2.6 39.0 0.8

Lotion 8 1 1 37.0
Hair care 5 1 0.1 0.5 0.015
Deodorant 0.5 1 1 0.030 1.5
Nail polish 0.25 0.28 1 0.34 0.01
Skin cleanser 2.5 2 0.1 0.12 0.01
Total (adult female)b 0.03 2.6 78 0.36 0.82

Baby lotion 1.4 0.14 1 0.37 0.01

Baby shampoo 0.51 0.27 0.01 0.001
Baby diaper cream 1.4 1.72 1 20
Baby oil 1.3 1.57 1 0.10
Total 0.5-4 yrsc 20 0.01

Baby lotion 1.4 0.14 1 0.75 0.02

Baby shampoo 0.51 0.27 0.01 0.003
Baby diaper cream 1.4 1.72 1 41
Baby oil 1.3 1.57 1 0.21
Total 0 -6 mo.d 42 0.02

DMP ¼dimethyl phthalate, DEP ¼ diethyl phthalate, DiBP ¼ diisobutyl phthalate, DnBP¼ di-n-butyl phthalate, DEHP¼ di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate.
a
For concentrations see Table 4. Exposure was not estimated when phthalates were detected at traces (10 mg/g or less).
b
Assuming body weight (bw) of 60 kg (EC, 1998).
c
Assuming body weight of 15.5 kg (EC, 1998).
d
Assuming body weight of 7.5 kg (EC, 1998).

Table 6
Experimentally derived and model estimation of skin absorption and permeation of selected phthalate.

Chemical Rat skin Human skin Reference In Silicoa

Absorption Permeability Absorption Permeability Permeability

rate (mg/cm2/h) coefficient (cm/h) rate (mg/cm2/h) coefficient (cm/h) coefficient (cm/h)

DMP 41.6 7 4.18 34.50 7 3.51  10  5 3.957 0.64 3.32 70.54  10  5 Scott et al. (1987) 1.63  10  3
DEP 41.37 7 9.28 37.00 78.3  10  5 1.277 0.11 1.14 70.10  10  5 Scott et al. (1987) 4.19  10  3
DnBP 39.2 1.7 Mint and Hotchkiss (1993) 5.72  10  2
DnBP 9.337 0.09 8.95 7 0.09  10  5 0.077 0.02 0.23 70.06  10  5 Scott et al. (1987) 5.72  10  2
DEHP 2.247 0.23 2.28 7 0.23  10  5 1.067 0.23 0.57 70.12  10  5 Scott et al. (1987) NCb
DEHP 0.427 0.13  10  3 4.31 7 1.28  10  7 0.107 0.02  10  3 1.057 0.21  10  7 Barber et al. (1992) NCb

DMP ¼dimethyl phthalate; DEP ¼diethyl phthalate; DnBP ¼di-n-butyl phthalate; DEHP ¼ di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate.
a
These permeability coefficients were not obtained from the cited references but were calculated with the NIOSH (2009) Skin Permeation Calculator available at
/www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/skin/skinPermCalc.htmlS using the Potts and Guy (1992) model.
b
Not calculated (NC): since the Log Kow value of 7.6 for DEHP was outside range of dataset used by Potts and Guy (1992).

The resulting exposure dosage was multiplied by 2 to account for
application of nail polish products to fingers and toes.
The parameters of consumer use patterns in Table 5 were
based on the existing consumer use patterns and were expected
to represent conservative estimates (U.S. EPA, 2008; RIVM, 2006;
Wormuth et al., 2006). A more accurate reflection of real life
consumer use patterns could be generated using a probabilistic
modeling such as based on current consumer use patterns. But it
would require a collection of large sample sizes of the market
data on the consumer use pattern in Canada for the statistical
analysis. Although an exposure distribution in terms of quantity
and frequency of product used per day might be helpful in the
assessment of human exposure, collection of large sample of
product users could be costly and time consuming, and the data
on products use might not be readily available.
Consumers are in dermal contact with various cosmetic and
personal care products on a daily basis. Babies and young children
are vulnerable groups with respect to phthalates due to their
developmental status than is the general population. The Amer-
ican Academy of Pediatrics published a study (Sathyanarayana
et al., 2008) stating that infants are exposed to phthalates in
infants’ products including baby lotions, baby powder and baby
shampoo. With respect to the third group, women are likely to
use more cosmetic and personal care products than the male
population. Age-behavioral patterns of teenagers and adults are
similar (Wormuth et al., 2006).
Only the fragrance products had sufficiently high detection
frequency of DEP to produce a median value of DEP (1679 mg/g)
(Table 4). The median values for other phthalates in our study
were below the detection due to infrequent detection (Table 4).
The estimation of median dermal daily exposure of DEP (2.6 mg/
kg bw/d) was similar to the mean exposure of 2.017 mg/kg bw/d
reported by Koo and Lee (2004) based on their measured levels of
phthalates in cosmetic and personal care products and use data
obtained from a questionnaire administered during the study. In
our study, children’s exposure to DEP (42 and 20 mg/kg bw/d, for
 D. Koniecki et al. / Environmental Research 111 (2011) 329–336
babies and toddlers, respectively) were two to four times lower
compared to female adults’ exposure to DEP (78 mg/kg bw/d).
Sathyanarayana et al. (2008) also demonstrated that baby care
products represent a dermal route of exposure with relevance for
infants, as use of baby lotions, baby powder, and baby shampoo
was associated with increased concentrations of DEP, DMP, and
DiBP metabolites in their urine. Although our study did indicate
potential exposure of babies to DEP through the use of baby care
products, the correlation between DMP and DiBP metabolites in
urine and the use of these products remains to be explained as
babies’ exposure to DMP and DiBP from baby care products
appears to be minimal.
One has to bear in mind that the exposure estimates presented
in Table 5 do have limitations. In addition to specific assumptions
for percutaneous absorption for skin products and subungual
penetration rate for nail polish products, the use pattern data
were not generated for this study but were based on the existing
data (U.S. EPA, 2008; RIVM, 2006; Wormuth et al., 2006). Limited
sample size that possibly precluded including all products for-
mulated with phthalates might introduce errors in the estimation
of exposure dosages as well. It should be also recognized that
exposure through other routes such as food intake and inhalation
of indoor air must be considered when assessing the total human
exposure to phthalates (Wormuth et al., 2006).
5. Conclusion
Our in market survey of 252 products in Canada including
baby products showed that DEP is the predominant phthalate
used in cosmetic and personal care products, followed by DnBP
and DEHP. Fragrances and lotions followed by deodorants appear
to be the primary source of exposure to DEP, while nail polishes
are the primary source of DnBP.
Our findings are consistent with other studies. While DEP is
continuing to be used in cosmetics and personal care products,
the use of both DnBP and DEHP in cosmetic and personal care
products is being phased out in the European Union, and DEHP is
listed on Health Canada’s Cosmetic Ingredient Hotlist that prohi-
bits its use in cosmetics, including personal care products. Under
Canadian legislation, cosmetics that contain substances that are
harmful to the user cannot be sold. Such regulatory policy
development and risk mitigation measures might contribute to
the decline of DnBP use in cosmetic and personal care products in
recent years as reflected in our market survey.
Acknowledgment
This study was funded by the Canadian Federal Government
under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. Dr. Wang is a
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada’s
Government Laboratory Visiting Fellow.
Appendix A. Supplementary Material
Supplementary data associated with this article can be found
in the online version at doi:10.1016/j.envres.2011.01.013.
References
Adibi, J.J., Whyatt, R.M., Williams, P.L., Calafat, A.M., Camann, D., Herrick, R., 2008.
Characterization of phthalate exposure among pregnant women assessed by
repeat air and urine samples. Environ. Health Perspect. 116, 467–473.
335
Azzi, C.G., Zhang, J., Purdon, C.H., Smith, E.W., 1995. Topical dermatological vehicles:
engineering the delivery system. In: Bronaugh, RL, Maibach, HI (Eds.), Percuta-
neous Absorption Drugs—Cosmetics—Mechanisms—Methodology Fourth ed.
Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 801–810.
Barber, E.D., Teetsel, N.M., Kolberg, K.F., Guest, D., 1992. A comparative study of
the rates of in vitro percutaneous absorption of eight chemicals using rat and
human skin. Fund. Appl. Toxicol. 19, 493–497.
Benson, R., 2009. Hazard to the developing male reproductive system from
cumulative exposure to phthalate esters—dibutyl phthalate, diisobutyl phtha-
late, butylbenzyl phthalate, diethylhexyl phthalate, diphenyl phthalate, and
diisononyl phthalate. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 53, 90–101.
Blount, B.C., Silva, M.J., Caudill, S.P., Needham, L.L., Pirkle, J.L., Sampson, E.J., Lucier,
G.W., Jackson, R.J., Brock, J.W., 2000. Levels of seven urinary phthalate
metabolites in a human reference population. Environ. Health Perspect. 108,
979–982.
Borch, J., Axelstad, M., Vinggaard, A.M., Dalgaard, M., 2006. Diisobutyl phthalate
has comparable anti-androgenic effects to di-n-butyl phthalate in fetal rat
testis. Toxicol. Lett. 163, 183–190.
Bronaugh, R.L., Stewart, R.F., Congdon, E.R., 1982. Methods for in vitro percuta-
neous absorption studies. II. animal models for human skin. Toxicol. Appl.
Pharmacol. 62, 481–488.
Bornehag, C.G., Sundell, J., Weschler, C.J., Sigsgaard, T., Lundgren, B., Hasselgran, M.,
Hagerhed-Engman, L., 2004. The association between asthma and allergic
symptoms in children and phthalates in house dust: a nested case-control
study. Environ. Health Perspect. 112, 1393–1397.
Bornehag, C.G., Lundgern, B., Weschler, C.J., Sigsgaard, T., Hagerhed-Engman, L.,
2005. Phthalates in indoor dust and their association with building character-
istics. Environ. Health Perspect. 113, 1399–1404.
B +S Chemie, 2000. Diisobutyl Phthalate. Material Safety Data Sheet. B +S Chemie.
GmbH. 6pp.
Calafat, A., McKee, R., 2006. Integrating biomonitoring exposure data into the risk
assessment process: phthalates [diethyl phthalate and di(2-ethylhexyl) phtha-
late] as a case study. Environ. Health Perspect. 114, 1783–1789.
Chan, P.K.L., Meek, M.E., 1994. Di-n-butyl phthalate: evaluation of risks to health
from environmental exposure in Canada. J. Environ. Sci. Health, Part C,
Environ. Carcinog. Ecotoxicol. Rev. 12, 257–268.
Christiansen, S., Scholze, M., Axelstad, M., Boberg, J., Kortenkamp, A., Hass, U.,
2008. Combined exposure to anti-androgens causes markedly increased
frequency of hypospadias in the rat. J. Androl. 31, 241–248.
CDC [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention], 2005. Third National Report on
Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals, Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, Atlanta, GA. Available at /http://www.cdc.gov/exposurerepon/S.
Duty, S.M., Ackerman, R.M., Calafat, A.M., Houser, R., 2005. Personal care product
use predicts urinary concentrations of some phthalate monoesters. Environ.
Health Perspect. 113, 1530–1535.
Deutschle, T., Reiter, R., Butte, W., Heinzow, B., Keck, T., Riechelmann, H., 2008. A
controlled challenge study on di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) in house dust
and the immune response in human nasal mucosa of allergic subjects. Environ.
Health Perspect. 116, 1487–1493.
Destaillats, H., Maddalena, R.L., Singer, B.C., Hodgson, A.T., McKone, T.E., 2008.
Indoor pollutants emitted by office equipment: a review of reported data and
information needs. Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health 210, 345–349.
ECB [European Chemicals Bureau], 2008. European Union Risk Assessment Report
bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) (CAS No: 117-81-7). 2nd Priority List vol:
80 European Commission/Joint Research Centre. Available at /http://ecb.jrc.itS.
EFSA [European Food Safety Authority], 2005a. Opinion of the Scientific Panel on
food additives, flavourings, processing aids and materials in contact with food
(AFC) related to Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP) for use in food contact
materials. EFSA J. 243, 1–20.
EFSA [European Food Safety Authority], 2005b. Opinion of the scientific panel on
food additives, flavourings, processing aids and materials in contact with food
(AFC) on a request from the commission related to di-butylphthalate (DBP) for
use in food contact materials. Question No. EFSA-Q-2003-192. EFSA J. 242,
1–17.
Elsisi, A.D, Carter, D.E., Sipes, I.G., 1989. Dermal absorption of phthalate diesters in
rats. Fund. Appl. Toxicol. 12, 7077.
Foster, P., Cattley, R.C., Mylchreest, E., 2000. Effects of di-n-butyl phthalate (DBP)
on male reproductive development in the rat: implications for human risk
assessment. Food Chem. Toxicol. 38, S97–S99.
Foster, P., 2006. Distruption of reproductive development in male rat offspring
following in utero exposure to phthalate esters. Int. J. Androl. 29, 140–147.
Geiss, O., Tirendi, S., Barrero-Moreno, J., Kotzias, D., 2009. Investigation of volatile
organic compounds and phthalates present in the cabin air of used private
cars. Environ. Int. 35, 1188–1195.
Grandjean, P., Toppari, J., 2006. Possible effects of phthalate exposure in doses
relevant for humans. Int. J. Androl. 29, 181–185.
Greenpeace, 2005. Perfume—An investigation of chemicals in 36 eauz de toilette
and eauz de parfum. Greenpeace International. Available at /http://www.
greenpeace.org/international/en/publications/reports/perfume-an-investigatio
n-of/S.
Gwinn, M.R., Whipkey, D.L., Tennant, L.B., Weston, A., 2007. Gene expression
profiling of di-n-butyl phthalate in normal human mammary epithelial cells.
J. Environ. Pathol. Toxicol. Oncol. 26, 51–61.
Gray, L.E., Ostby, J., Furr, J., Price, M., Veeramachaneni, D.N.R., Parks, L., 2000.
Perinatal exposure to phthalates DEHP, BBP, and DINP, but not DEP, DMP or
DOTP, althers sexual differentiation of the male rat. Toxicol. Sci. 58, 350–365.
336 D. Koniecki et al. / Environmental Research 111 (2011) 329–336
Hauser, R., Calafat, A.M., 2005. Phthalate and human health. Occup. Environ. Med.
62, 806–818.
EC [Health Canada], 2009a. Cosmetics and Personal Care. Health Canada (EC),
Consumer Product Safety. Available at /www.hc-sc.gc.ca/cps-spc/person/
cosmet/index-eng.phpS.
EC [Health Canada],2009b Proposed Phthalates Regulations for Soft Vinyl Chil-
dren’s Toys and Child Care Articles. Available at /http://hc-sc.gc.ca/cps-spc/
legislation/consultation/phthalates-phthalates-eng.phpS.
EC [Health Canada],1998. Exposure factors for assessing total daily intake of
Priority Substances by the general population of Canada. Unpublished report,
December 1998. Ottawa (ON): Priority Substances Section, Environmental
Health Directorate.
EC/EC [Health Canada/Environment Canada], 1994a. Dibutyl phthalate. Canadian
Environmental Protection Act, Priority Substances List Assessment. Ottawa
(ON): Minister of Supply and Services of Canada, 34 pp.
EC/EC [Health Canada/Environment Canada], 1994. Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate.
Canadian Environmental Protection Act, Priority Substances List Assessment.
Minister of Supply and Services of Canada, Ottawa (ON), pp. 44.
Heudorf, U., Mersch-Sundermann, V., Angerer, J., 2007. Phthalates: toxicology and
exposure. Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health 210, 623–634.
Hines, E.P., Calafat, A.M., Silva, M.J., Mendola, P., Fenton, S.E., 2009. Concentrations
of phthalate metabolites in milk, urine, saliva, and serum of lactating North
Carolina women. Environ. Health Perspect. 117, 86–92.
Högberg, J., Hanberg, A., Berglund, M., Skerfving, S., Remberger, M., Calafat, A.M.,
Filipsson, A.F., Jansson, B., Johansson, N., Appelgren, M., Håkansson, H., 2008.
Phthalate diesters and their metabolites in human breast milk, blood or serum,
and urine as biomarkers of exposure in vulnerable populations. Environ.
Health Perspect. 116, 334–339.
Houlihan, J., Brody, C., Schwan, B., 2002. ‘‘Not Too Pretty’’ Phthalates, beauty
products and the FDA. Available at /www.ewg.org/reports/nottooprettyS.
Howdeshell, K., Wilson, V., Furr, J., Lambright, C., Rider, C., Blystone, C., Hotchkiss,
A., Gray, L., 2008. A mixture of five phthalate esters inhibit fetal testicular
testosterone production in the Sprague-Dawley rat in a cumulative, dose
additive manner. Toxicol. Sci. 105, 153–165.
Hubinger, J.C., Harvey, D.C., 2006. Analysis of consumer cosmetic products for
phthalate esters. J. Cosmetic Sci. 57, 127–137.
IARC [International Agency for Research on Cancer], 2000. Some industrial
chemicals. IARC Monographs 77, 41–148.
Jackson, E.M., 2008. Subungual penetration of dibutyl phthalate in human finger-
nails. Skin Pharmacol. Physiol. 21, 10–14.
Janjua, N.R., Mortensen, G.K., Andersson, A.M., Kongshoj, B., Skakkebk, N.E., Wulf,
H.C., 2007. Systemic uptake of diethyl phthalate, dibutyl phthalate, and butyl
paraben following whole body topical application and reproductive and
thyroid hormone levels in humans. Environ. Sci. Technol. 41, 5564–5570.
Jakkola, J.J.K., Knight, T.L., 2008. The role of exposure to phthalates from polyvinyl
chloride products in the development of asthma and allergies: a systematic
review and metaanalysis. Environ. Health Perspect. 116, 845–853.
Kamrin, A.M., 2009. Phthalates risk, phthalates regulation, and public health: a
review. J. Toxicol. Environ. Health, Part B 12, 157–174.
Koch, H.M., Bolt, H.M., Preuss, R., Angerer, J., 2005. New metabolites of di (2-
ethylhexyl) phthalate DEHP in human urine and serum after single oral doses
of deuterium-labelled DEHP. Archives Toxicol. 79, 367–376.
Koo, H.J., Lee, B.M., 2004. Estimated exposure to phthalates in cosmetics and risk
assessment. J. Toxicol. Environ. Health 67, 1901–1914.
Koralik, B., Naydenov, K., Larsson, M., Bornehag, C.G., Sundell, J., 2008. The
association between phthalates in dust and allergic diseases among Bulgarian
children. Environ. Health Perspect. 116, 98–103.
Lee, K.Y., Shibutani, M., Takagi, H., Kato, N., Takigami, S., Uneyama, C., Hirose, M.,
2004. Diverse developmental toxicity of di-n-butyl phthalate in both sexes of
rat offspring after maternal exposure during the period from late gestation
through lactation. Toxicology 203, 221–238.
Latini, G., Wittassek, M., Del Vecchio, A., Presta, G., De Felice, C., Angerer, J., 2009.
Lactational exposure to phthalates in Southern Italy. Environ. Int. 35, 236–239.
Latini, G., De Felice, C., Verrotti, A., 2004. Plasticizers, infant and reproductive
health. Reprod. Toxicol. 19, 27–33.
Lehmann, K., Phillips, S., Sar, M., Foster, P., Gaido, K., 2004. Dose-dependent
alterations in gene expression and testosterone synthesis in the fetal testes of
male rats exposed to di (n-butyl) phthalate. Toxicol. Sci. 81, 60–68.
Lyche, L.J., Gutleb, A., Bergman, A., Erikson, S.G., Murk, A.J., Ropstad, E., Saunders,
M., Skaare, J.U., 2009. Reproductive and developmental toxicity of phthalates.
J. Toxicol. Environ. Health, Part B 12, 225–249.
Main, K.M., Mortensen, G.K., Kaleva, M.M., Boisen, K.A., Damgaard, I.N., Chella-
kooty, M., 2006. Human breast milk contamination with phthalates and
alterations of endogenous reproductive hormones in infants three months of
age. Environ. Health Perspect. 114, 270–276.
Meek, M.E., Chan, P.K.L., 1994. Bis (2-ethylhexhyl) phthalate: evaluation of risks to
health from environmental exposure in Canada. J. Environ. Sci. and Health.
Part C. Environ. Carcinog. and Ecotoxicol. Rev. 12, 179–194.
Mint, A., Hotchkiss, S.A.M., 1993. Percutaneous absorption of dimethyl phthalate
and di-n-butylphthalate through rat and human skin in vitro. In: Brain, KR,
James, VJ, Hadgraft, J, Walters, KA (Eds.), Prediction of Percutaneous Penetra-
tion, Vol 3B. STS Publishing Cardiff, pp. 646–657.
Mint, A., Hotchkiss, S.A.M., Caldwell, J., 1994. Percutaneous absorption of diethyl
phthalate through rat and human skin in vitro. Toxicol. in Vitro 2, 251–256.
Mylchreest, E., Cattley, R.C., Foster, P.M., 1998. Male reproductive tract malforma-
tions in rats following gestational and lactational exposure to di(n-butyl)
phthalate: an antiandrogenic mechanism? Toxicol. Sci. 43, 47–60.
NRC [National Research Council], 2008. Phthalates and cumulative risk assess-
ment: The tasks ahead. Committee on the Health Risks of Phthalates.
Prepublication Copy. The National Academies Press. Washington, D.C. 175
pp. Available at /www.nationalacademies.orgS.
NIOSH [National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health], 2009. Skin
Permeation Calculator. Available at /www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/skin/skin
PermCalc.htm1S.
Payan, J.P., Marty, J.P., Fabry, J.P., Beydon, D., Boudry, I., Ferrari, E., Canel, F.,
Granclaude, M.C., Vincent, C.M., 2001. In vivo and in vitro percutaneous
absorption of [14C] Di-n-butylphthalate in rat. Am. Soc. Pharacol. Exp. Therap.
29, 843–854.
Potts, R.O., Guy, R.H., 1992. Predicting skin permeability. Pharm. Res. 9, 663–669.
RIVM, 2006. Consumer Exposure (ConsExpo) Model [Internet]. Version 4.1. The
National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, The Netherlands
Available at.
Rank, J., 2005. Classification and risk assessment of chemicals: the case of DEHP in
the light of REACH. J. Trans.disciplinary Environ. Studies 4, 1602–2297.
Sathyanarayana, S., Karr, C.J., Lozano, P., Brown, E., Calafat, A.M., Liu, F., Swan, S.H.,
2008. Baby care products: possible sources of infant phthalates exposure.
Pediatrics 121, 260–268.
SCCNFP [Scientific Committee on Cosmetic Products and Non-Food Products
Intended for Consumers], 2002. Opinion on diethyl phthalate in cosmetic
products adopted during the 20th Plenary meeting of 4 June 2002, Brussels,
SCCNFP/0411/01, 36 pp.
SCCP [Scientific Committee on Consumer Products], 2007. Opinion on phthalates
in cosmetic products opinion adopted at the 11th plenary meeting of 21
March 2007, Brussels, SCCP/1016/06, 19 pp.
Schettler, T., 2006. Human exposure to phthalates via consumer products. Int. J.
Androl. 29, 134–139.
Schripp, T., Fauck, C., Salthammer, T., 2010. Chamber studies on mass-transfer of
di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP) and di- n-butylphthalate (DnBP) from
emission sources into house dust. Atmos. Environ. 44, 2840–2845.
Scott, R.C., Dugard, P.H., Ramsey, J.D., Rhodes, C., 1987. In vitro absorption of some
o-phthalate diesters through human and rat skin. Environ. Health Perspect. 74,
223–227.
Swan, S.H., Main, K.M., Liu, F., Stewart, S.L., Kruse, R.L., Calafat, A.M., Mao, C.S.,
Redmon, J.B., Ternand, C.L., Sullivan, S., Teague, J.L., 2005. Anogenital distance – a
marker of fetal androgen action – is decreased in male infants following phthalate
exposure during pregnancy. Environ. Health Perspect. 113, 1056–1061.
Takatori, S., Akutsu, K., Kondo, F., Izumi, S., Makino, T., Nakazawa, H., 2007.
Determination of phthalate monoester levels in human breast milk by high
pressure liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry. Bunseki Kagaku
56, 225–231 (in Japanese).
U.S. EPA [United States Environmental Protection Agency], 1993. Diethyl phthalate
(DEP) (CASRN 84-66-2). Integrated Risk Information System. Available at
/www.epa.gov/NCEA/iris/subst/0226.htmS.
U.S. EPA [United States Environmental Protection Agency], 1991. Di(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate (DEHP) (CASRN 117-81-7). ). Integrated Risk Information System.
Available at /www.epa.gov/iris/subst/0038.htmS.
U.S EPA [United States Environmental Protection Agency], 2006. Toxicological
review of dibutyl phthalate (external peer review draft). Available at /www.
epa.gov/ncea/iris/recent_2006.htmlS date of entry 2006-06-27.
U.S. EPA [United States Environmental Protection Agency], 2008. Child-specific
exposure factors handbook. National Center for Environmental Assessment,
Office of Research and Development. EPA/600/R-06/096 F. Available at
/http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/CFM/S.
Wang, R., Moody, R.P., Koniecki, D., Zhu, J., 2009. Low molecular weight cyclic
volatile methylsiloxanes in cosmetic products sold in Canada: implication for
dermal exposure. Environ. Int. 35, 900–904.
Wittassek, M., Angerer, J., 2008. Phthalates: metabolism and exposure. Int. J.
Androl. 31, 131–138.
Wittassek, M., Angerer, J., Kolossa-Gehring, M., Schäfer, S.D., Klockenbusch, W.,
Dobler, L., Günsel, A.K., Müller, A., Wiesmüller, G.A., 2009. Fetal exposure to
phthalates—a pilot study. Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health 212, 492–498.
Wolfe, G.W., Layton, K.A., 2003. Multigeneration reproduction toxicity study in
rats: multigenerational reproductive assessment by continuous breeding
when administered to Sprague-Dawley rats in the diet. The Immune Research
Corporation, Gaithersburg, MD.
Wormuth, M., Scheringer, M., Vollenweider, M., Hungerbuhler, K., 2006. What are
the sources of exposure to eight frequently used phthalic acid esters in
Europeans? Risk Anal. 26, 803–824.
Xu, Y., Hubal, E.A.C., Little, J.C., 2010. Predicting residential exposure to phthalate
plasticizer emitted from vinyl flooring: sensitivity, uncertainty, and implica-
tions for biomonitoring. Environ. Health Perspect. 118 (2), 253–258.
Zhu, J., Phillips, S.P., Feng, Y.-L., Yang, X., 2006. Phthalate esters in human milk:
concentration variations over a six-month postpartum time. Environ. Sci.
Technol. 40, 5276–5281.