Prev. Article Next Article Table of Contents

Article

Dioxin, Not Doomsday

Your current credentials do not allow retrieval of the full text.

Purchase the full-text

PDF/HTML,
figures/images,
references and tables,
(where available)

Jeffrey M. Zimpleman

Department of Chemistry, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755

J. Chem. Educ., 1999, 76 (12), p 1662

DOI: 10.1021/ed076p1662

Publication Date (Web): December 1, 1999

Section:

History, Education, and Documentation

Abstract

TCDD, more formally 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin or often simply "dioxin", has been and continues to be a subject of controversy in the scientific community. Numerous papers present studies supporting or rejecting the hypothesis that dioxin is dangerous to humans. Some proclaim that industry is completely culpable for the dioxin that is put into the environment, and that TCDD is one of the deadliest molecules that man has ever made. However, industry is not the sole source of dioxin; it has been found in 8,000-year-old soil samples and can be produced by forest fires and enzymes in soil microorganisms. Moreover, on the basis of findings from epidemiologic cohort studies, dioxin appears not to be as potent a carcinogen or teratogen as popularly thought. In fact, through its antiestrogenic properties, dioxin may provide a weapon against breast cancer. Industry can reduce the amount of dioxin released by trapping it with fly ash and plastics. The reduction of chlorine content in incinerators has been suggested as another method to control emissions; but this may not help, because the correlation between chlorine and dioxin formation is not entirely clear.