Triclosan (TCS) and triclocarban (TCC) are antimicrobials that are widely applied in personal care products, textiles, and plastics. TCS and TCC exposure at low doses may disturb hormone levels and even facilitate bacterial resistance to antibiotics. In the post-coronavirus disease pandemic era, chronic health effects and the spread of antibiotic resistance genes associated with TCS and TCC exposure represent an increasing concern. This study sought to screen and review the exposure levels and sources and changes after the onset of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, potential health outcomes, bacterial resistance and cross-resistance, and health risk assessment tools associated with TCS and TCC exposure. Daily use of antimicrobial products accounts for most observed associations between internal exposure and diseases, while secondary exposure at trace levels mainly lead to the spread of antibiotic resistance genes. The roles of altered gut microbiota in multi-system toxicities warrant further attention. Sublethal dose of TCC selects ARGs without obviously increasing tolerance to TCC. But TCS induce persistent TCS resistance and reversibly select antibiotic resistance, which highlights the benefits of minimizing its use. To derive reference doses (RfDs) for humans, more sensitive endpoints observed in populational studies need to be confirmed using toxicological tests. Additionally, the human equivalent dose is recommended to be incorporated into the health risk assessment to reduce uncertainty of extrapolation.

In the late 1930s and early 1940s, it was discovered that the substitution on aromatic rings of hydrogen atoms with chlorine yielded a novel chemistry of antimicrobials. However, within a few years, many of these compounds and formulations showed adverse effects, including human toxicity, ecotoxicity, and unwanted environmental persistence and bioaccumulation, quickly leading to regulatory bans and phase-outs. Among these, the triclocarban, a polychlorinated aromatic antimicrobial agent, was employed as a major ingredient of toys, clothing, food packaging materials, food industry floors, medical supplies, and especially of personal care products, such as soaps, toothpaste, and shampoo. Triclocarban has been widely used for over 50 years, but only recently some concerns were raised about its endocrine disruptive properties. In September 2016, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration banned its use in over-the-counter hand and body washes because of its toxicity. The withdrawal of triclocarban has prompted the efforts to search for new antimicrobial compounds and several analogues of triclocarban have also been studied. In this review, an examination of different facets of triclocarban and its analogues will be analyzed.

Antimicrobial compounds are used in a broad range of personal care, consumer and healthcare products and are frequently encountered in modern life. The use of these compounds is being reexamined as their safety, effectiveness and necessity are increasingly being questioned by regulators and consumers alike. Wastewater often contains significant amounts of these chemicals, much of which ends up being released into the environment as existing wastewater and sludge treatment processes are simply not designed to treat many of these contaminants. Furthermore, many biotic and abiotic processes during wastewater treatment can generate significant quantities of potentially toxic and persistent antimicrobial metabolites and byproducts, many of which may be even more concerning than their parent antimicrobials. This review article explores the occurrence and fate of two of the most common legacy antimicrobials, triclosan and triclocarban, their metabolites/byproducts during wastewater and sludge treatment and their potential impacts on the environment. This article also explores the fate and transformation of emerging alternative antimicrobials and addresses some of the growing concerns regarding these compounds. This is becoming increasingly important as consumers and regulators alike shift away from legacy antimicrobials to alternative chemicals which may have similar environmental and human health concerns.

The halogenated antimicrobial triclocarban (TCC) has large production and consumption over last decades. Its extensive utilization in personal care products and insufficient treatment in conventional wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) has led to its listing as one of emerging organic contaminants (EOCs). Due to the hydrophobicity and chemical stability of TCC, it has been omnipresent detected in terrestrial and aquatic environments, and its prolonged exposure has thrown potential pernicious threat to ecosystem and human health. Considering its recalcitrance, especially under anoxic conditions, both biological and non-biological methods have been exploited for its removal. The efficiency of advanced oxidation processes was optimistic, but complete removal can rarely be realized through a single method. The biodegradation of TCC either with microbial community or pure culture is feasible but efficient bacterial degraders and the molecular mechanism of degradation need to be further explored. This review provides comprehensive information of the occurrence, potential ecological and health effects, and biological and non-biological removal of TCC, and outlines future prospects for the risk evaluation and enhanced bioremediation of TCC in various environments.

This article reviews laboratory and epidemiological research into the endocrine disruptive effects of components of personal care products, namely, phthalate esters, parabens, ultraviolet (UV) filters, polycyclic musks, and antimicrobials. High doses of phthalates in utero can produce “phthalate syndrome,” demasculinizing effects in male rat offspring due to impaired testosterone production by fetal testes. However, evidence linking phthalate exposure to similar effects in humans appears inconclusive. Furthermore, phthalate exposure derived from personal care products is within safe limits and its principal bioavailable phthalate, diethyl phthalate (DEP), does not produce “phthalate syndrome.” Parabens exhibit very weak estrogen activity in vitro and in vivo, but evidence of paraben-induced developmental and reproductive toxicity in vivo lacks consistency and physiological coherence. Evidence attempting to link paraben exposure with human breast cancer is nonexistent. Select UV filters at high doses produce estrogenic, antithyroid, and other effects in rats in vivo. Again, no evidence links UV filter exposure to endocrine disruptive effects in humans. Some polycyclic musks weakly bind to estrogen, androgen, or progestin receptors and exhibit primarily antagonistic activity in vitro, which for the most part, has yet to be confirmed in vivo in mammals. The antimicrobials triclocarban and triclosan evoke weak responses mediated by aryl hydrocarbon, estrogen, and androgen receptors in vitro, which require confirmation in vivo. Preliminary observations suggest a novel interaction between triclocarban and testosterone. In conclusion, although select constituents exhibit interactions with the endocrine system in the laboratory, the evidence linking personal care products to endocrine disruptive effects in humans is for the most part lacking.