TOXICOLOGICAL PROFILE FOR CHROMIUM - Davidborowski.com

CHROMIUM 2232. HEALTH EFFECTShad not exercised in the previous 24 hours (0.67 µg/L) than for those who had (0.56 µg /L) (p=0.08), fordiabetics (1.38 µg/L) than for nondiabetics (0.58 µg/L) (p=0.09), and for those with past workingexperience in chromium industries (0.74 µg/L) than for those with no previous occupational exposure(0.6 µg/L) (p=0.14). While the results of this study indicate that monitoring urine and red blood cells forchromium may not be useful in environmentally exposed individuals, the number of individuals studiedwas small. However, any biological monitoring for low-level environmental exposure to chromiumshould consider confounding variables, including chromium dietary supplements.The chromium content in spot urine samples of 1,740 persons living or working in Hudson County, NewJersey and vicinity where there are over 160 chromium waste sites was examined by Fagliano et al.(1997). This group was recruited among people living within one or two blocks of a known waste site.The comparison group was composed of 315 people from 7 surrounding counties. The screening wasperformed in 1992 and 1993, and exposure may have resulted from inhalation, ingestion, or skin contactwith contaminated soils. Approximately half of the individuals in both groups had urinary chromiumconcentrations below the limit of quantitation (0.2 µg/L). For analysis, values below the quantitationlimit were assigned a value of 0.1 µg/L, one-half the quantitation limit. The average urine chromiumlevels of both residents and workers were slightly higher than those from the comparison group (0.20versus 0.22 µg/L), but the median of both groups was 0.2 µg/L. The 90 th percentile was 0.53 µg/L in thecomparison group and 0.72 µg/L in the screening group. Higher chromium levels were seen among thosewith exposure to dust in the prior 48 hours (house cleaning, sweeping at work, dusty work environment).The largest difference among age groups was among children ages 1–5 with a mean of 0.19 µg/L in thecomparison group (N=18) and 0.35 µg/L in the screening group (N=52). Of the 1,740 individualsscreened, 158 had urine levels above 0.5 µg/L and were referred for further medical evaluation. Of thisgroup, three had medical conditions (persistent respiratory allergies and dermatologic conditions) wherechromium exposure could not be ruled out as a cause.The usefulness of biomarkers of exposure depends largely on the form of chromium in the environment.A series of experiments in volunteers (Finley et al. 1996b; Gargas et al. 1994; Kerger et al. 1997) havedemonstrated bioavailabilty ranging from