Environmental Health Criteria 214

More documents

Recommendations

Info

HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Public Health Service's 1962 drinking water standard of 3 pCi/litre. The time periods 1969-1971 and 1973-1978 were studied for all 28 municipalities in Iowa. After testing each town for radium-226 levels, the towns were divided into three groups, with respectively 0-2, 2-5 and >5 pCi/litre of radium-226 in the water supply. In towns level > 5.0 pCi/litre, the incidence of lung and bladder cancer in men and lung and breast cancers among women was higher (Fig. 47). Although 77% of the individuals in the study had been on the same water supply for at least 10 years, misclassification due to uncertainties about past concentrations and past residential histories create problems for the study. A Taiwanese study of a population that used artesian wells suggests that there may be a link between high arsenic levels in drinking water and the incidence of internal cancers, particularly bladder cancer (Chiou et al., 1995). Levels above the maximal permitted level of 50 µg/litre occur in some locations in the western USA. In 1978 a study was done in Utah of individuals between the ages of 21 and 84. Concentrations of arsenic in the water ranged from 0.5 to 160 µg/litre (mean 5.0 µg/litre). Two indexes of exposure were used, both of them assuming constant past levels in the water supply: * total cumulative exposure was calculated using the duration of time spent in the town, the rate of water consumption, and the 1978 levels of arsenic in the drinking-water * intake concentration was calculated using the above measurements, as well as the total fluid intake, to approximate the arsenic concentration in the urine to which the bladder is exposed (Bates et al., 1995). Overall, no association between arsenic exposure and bladder cancer was seen with either index (Table 42). The only odds ratio (3.32) significantly different from 1 was for smokers with a cumulative dose greater than 53 mg. This suggests that smoking potentiates the relationship between arsenic and bladder cancer. That drinking-water can be a main source of exposure could be shown in the framework of German Environmental Survey (see Chapter 2.6). Drinking-water (first draw and grab samples, see Chapter 7.3.2) was analysed in approximately 4000 German households. A significant correlation was observed between the lead content in drinking water and the lead content in the blood of the population (Nöllke et al., 1995; Becker et al., 1997). 12.6 Exposure to microbes Examination of biological contamination involves a different approach, as discussed in Chapter 9. Bioaerosol samples are widely used and rely on impaction on to culture medium. The cut-off size of the samplers limits the ability to capture all bioaerosols, and no one culture medium and growth temperature is appropriate for all viable bacteria in the air. Therefore, the numbers from the impactor will be less than those actually present in the air because of limited power of detection. Chemical assay for endotoxin is independent of the ability to grow the bacteria, but it is sensitive to sampling and storage procedures. Previous studies of bioaerosols in the occupational setting have examined levels of airborne bacteria. A study of bioaerosols at water http://www.inchem.org/documents/ehc/ehc/ehc214.htm Page 226 of 284 6/1/2007
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT treatment plants was planned to go beyond previous studies and examine concentrations of both bacteria and endotoxin (Laitinen et al., 1994). Endotoxin (bacterial toxin not freely liberated into the surrounding medium) can cause fever, eye inflammation, fatigue and/or respiratory difficulties if inhaled, and may be a more reliable measure of Table 42. Adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 90% confidence intervals (CI) for b enrolled into the National Bladder Cancer Study in Utah in 1978 who h living in study towns (Bates et al., 1995) Exposure a All subjects Never smoked Cases Controls OR b 90% CI Cases Controls OR b 9 Exposure index (cumulative dose (mg)
Page 1 and 2:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT UNITED NA
Page 3 and 4:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT PREAMBLE
Page 5 and 6:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 6.6.2. Un
Page 7 and 8:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 10.6.7. B
Page 9 and 10:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT (iv) to p
Page 11 and 12:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Organizat
Page 13 and 14:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT WHO TASK
Page 15 and 16:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Dr M. You
Page 17 and 18:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Environme
Page 19 and 20:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT increase
Page 21 and 22:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT character
Page 23 and 24:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT include e
Page 25 and 26:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT http://ww
Page 27 and 28:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT the carri
Page 29 and 30:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT the ideal
Page 31 and 32:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT continuum
Page 33 and 34:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT as well a
Page 35 and 36:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT In regula
Page 37 and 38:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Results o
Page 39 and 40:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Risk miti
Page 41 and 42:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT trends of
Page 43 and 44:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Knowledge
Page 45 and 46:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT small tow
Page 47 and 48:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT * selecti
Page 49 and 50:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT provide s
Page 51 and 52:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT the water
Page 53 and 54:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Public po
Page 55 and 56:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT character
Page 57 and 58:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT PbB PbF P
Page 59 and 60:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT values in
Page 61 and 62:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT lead meas
Page 63 and 64:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Continuou
Page 65 and 66:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT logarithm
Page 67 and 68:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT events in
Page 69 and 70:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT -1.751 0.
Page 71 and 72:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT one is a
Page 73 and 74:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT house dus
Page 75 and 76:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT PM 2.5 co
Page 77 and 78:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 4.5 Non-p
Page 79 and 80:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT season, r
Page 81 and 82:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Table 15.
Page 83 and 84:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Activity
Page 85 and 86:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Similarly
Page 87 and 88:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT local con
Page 89 and 90:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Environme
Page 91 and 92:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT for tempo
Page 93 and 94:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT devices,
Page 95 and 96:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Using a d
Page 97 and 98:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT (gases an
Page 99 and 100:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Dermal ab
Page 101 and 102:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Models de
Page 103 and 104:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT partition
Page 105 and 106:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 6.6.1 Var
Page 107 and 108:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Probabili
Page 109 and 110:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT The ADD i
Page 111 and 112:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 7.1 Intro
Page 113 and 114:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT suitabili
Page 115 and 116:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Carbon mo
Page 117 and 118:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Samplin I
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT TSI Flowr
Page 123 and 124:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 2 litre/m
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT or increa
Page 129 and 130:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Fluosilic
Page 131 and 132:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT dependent
Page 133 and 134:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT basket su
Page 135 and 136:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT reasonabl
Page 137 and 138:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT There are
Page 139 and 140:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT predesign
Page 141 and 142:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT field wou
Page 143 and 144:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT samples v
Page 145 and 146:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT dust to,
Page 147 and 148:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Choosing
Page 149 and 150:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT others sh
Page 151 and 152:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT sampling
Page 153 and 154:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT of house
Page 155 and 156:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Individua
Page 157 and 158:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT subject o
Page 159 and 160:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT same assa
Page 161 and 162:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT high-volu
Page 163 and 164:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Immunoche
Page 165 and 166:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 9.5.1 Air
Page 167 and 168:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT measureme
Page 169 and 170:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT By their
Page 171 and 172:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT possess a
Page 173 and 174:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT factors (
Page 175 and 176: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Improved
Page 177 and 178: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT limited.
Page 179 and 180: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Media Che
Page 181 and 182: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT of venipu
Page 183 and 184: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Glands at
Page 185 and 186: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT breast-fe
Page 187 and 188: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT equipment
Page 189 and 190: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT only nume
Page 191 and 192: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT procedure
Page 193 and 194: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT clearly p
Page 195 and 196: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT The Shewh
Page 197 and 198: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT of statis
Page 199 and 200: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT as closel
Page 201 and 202: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT operation
Page 203 and 204: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT reports o
Page 205 and 206: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Indoor Ai
Page 207 and 208: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT (calcium,
Page 209 and 210: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 1984; Akl
Page 211 and 212: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT chemilumi
Page 213 and 214: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT carried o
Page 215 and 216: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT beverages
Page 217 and 218: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Total 11
Page 219 and 220: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT of mean c
Page 221 and 222: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 30 µg/dl
Page 223 and 224: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT The shell
Page 225: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 12.5 Expo
Page 229 and 230: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Aeration
Page 231 and 232: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT downwind
Page 233 and 234: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Governmen
Page 235 and 236: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Bercini D
Page 237 and 238: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Callahan
Page 239 and 240: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Centers f
Page 241 and 242: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Report of
Page 243 and 244: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Goldstein
Page 245 and 246: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT (1996) [E
Page 247 and 248: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Jimenez R
Page 249 and 250: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Seemayer
Page 251 and 252: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT carbon mo
Page 253 and 254: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT order sta
Page 255 and 256: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Lake, Nor
Page 257 and 258: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT effects o
Page 259 and 260: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Saraf A,
Page 261 and 262: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Silbergel
Page 263 and 264: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT retrospec
Page 265 and 266: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT UN ESCAP
Page 267 and 268: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT National
Page 269 and 270: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT Wallace L
Page 271 and 272: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT WHO (1995
Page 273 and 274: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT RÉSUMÉ
Page 275 and 276: HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT le point
Page 277 and 278:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT chercher
Page 279 and 280:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT tóxica a
Page 281 and 282:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 6. Modeli
Page 283 and 284:
HUMAN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT ambiental
show all

Environmental Health Criteria 214

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?