Protecting Human and Environmental Health Through Rational Chemical Design
This
essay is in response to: How can innovations in technology and research reduce exposures to toxic chemicals?
For the past 12 years, The 12 Principles of Green
Chemistry by Anastas and Warner have provided a cohesive set of design
guidelines for integrating sustainability in the chemical industry. The principles
call on chemists to recognize inherent hazard (whether physical, toxicological,
or global) as a design flaw and develop products that minimize hazard across
all stages of a chemical lifecycle from raw materials to manufacturing and
end-of-life. Since
the 1990s the field of green chemistry has flourished and the creativity of
researchers worldwide has led to success in pollution prevention through
advances in catalysis, benign solvents, and renewable chemical feedstocks.
Despite this progress, the principle
of green chemistry that deals with molecular design for reduced toxicity has
not yet been addressed in any systematic fashion. This has led to situations where
putative alternatives to high-profile toxins are as hazardous, or more so, than
the products they are meant to replace. There is irony in the fact that
chemicals like polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), bisphenol A (BPA), and
dioctyl phthalate have been much better characterized in terms of persistence,
bioaccumulation, and toxicity than have any of their replacement candidates.
Extensive pre-market testing in late
stages of product development is possible and has been successful in some cases,
for example the development of the non-phthalate plasticizer DINCH by BASF. However
it has been widely reported that BASF invested 5 million euros into toxicity
testing alone. A recent
editorial in Nature suggested
that compliance with REACH, the European chemicals regulation overhaul adopted
in 2006, will also have high costs; it was estimated that for each chemical to
be used in commerce, an expenditure of nearly US $200,000 and 800 vertebrate
animals will be necessary. Such costs may not be feasible for academic
laboratories, small companies, or manufacturers who wish to evaluate large
numbers of chemicals. Testing burdens could be mitigated by development of
predictive tools that could be applied in early stages of product conception.
For these tools to be realized there is a need for better understanding of the
relationship between toxic effects and basic physicochemical properties of
substances.
This approach would be analogous to the
drug discovery process in medicinal chemistry, in which the Lipinski rules for
drug-likeness have been formulated to predict what molecular features will lead
to pharmaceutically active compounds. The Lipinski rules are easy for chemists
to understand: limits on molecular weight, hydrophilicity, and number of
nitrogen and oxygen atoms, for example. For non-pharmaceutical chemicals, a
complementary set of guidelines would be extremely useful—plasticizers, flame
retardants, dyes, and many other commodity chemicals should not be biologically
active, so what are the properties that chemists should use as a simple
pre-screen when designing new molecules? The goal would be to provide ranges of
values associated with particular toxic endpoints or toxic mechanisms of
action.
Research at Yale has shown that this
approach is feasible: based on a statistical analysis of animal studies compiled
in the EPA ACToR database, it can be seen
that just a few chemical properties can distinguish chemicals listed on the EPA
Toxic Release Inventory from “safe” (i.e., high-lethal dose) chemicals or
random samples of chemicals. This work will be extended in the future to
include better molecular property prediction software and encompass a wider variety
of hazardous endpoints. It is not expected to replace conventional toxicity
testing, but could help reduce costs and animal burdens by red-flagging problem
chemicals before significant resources are invested. Easier alternative
assessment will provide scientists with easier choices in designing sustainable
chemical enterprise for the 21st century.
Comments Leave a Comment
Comments