You are not currently logged in.
Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Cognitive Effects of Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals in Animals
Susan L. Schantz and John J. Widholm
Environmental Health Perspectives
Vol. 109, No. 12 (Dec., 2001), pp. 1197-1206
Published by: The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3454741
Page Count: 10
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
Preview not available
A large number of chemical pollutants including phthalates, alkylphenolic compounds, polychlorinated biphenyls and polychlorinated dibenzodioxins, organochlorine pesticides, bisphenol A, and metals including lead, mercury, and cadmium have the ability to disrupt endocrine function in animals. Some of these same chemicals have been shown to alter cognitive function in animals and humans. Because hormonally mediated events play a central role in central nervous system development and function, a number of researchers have speculated that the changes in cognitive function are mediated by the endocrine-like actions of these chemicals. In this paper we review the evidence that cognitive effects of chemicals classified as environmental endocrine disruptors are mediated by changes in hormonal function. We begin by briefly reviewing the role of gonadal steroids, thyroid hormones, and glucocorticoids in brain development and brain function. We then review the endocrine changes and cognitive effects that have been reported for selected endocrine-disrupting chemicals, discuss the evidence for causal relationships between endocrine disruption and cognitive effects, and suggest directions for future research.
Environmental Health Perspectives © 2001 The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences