scholarly journals Bivariate Left-Censored Measurements in Biomonitoring: A Bayesian Model for the Determination of Biological Limit Values Based on Occupational Exposure Limits

2017 ◽  
Vol 61 (5) ◽  
pp. 515-527 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aurélie Martin Remy ◽  
Pascal Wild
Keyword(s):  
Occupational Exposure ◽  
Bayesian Model ◽  
Occupational Exposure Limits ◽  
Exposure Limits ◽  
Limit Values ◽  
Biological Limit Values

Nitroethane Documentation of proposed values of occupational exposure limits (OELs)

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (1(91)) ◽  
pp. 97-113
Author(s):  
Andrzej Sapota ◽  
Małgorzata Skrzypińska-Gawrysiak ◽  
ANNA KILANOWICZ
Keyword(s):  
Occupational Exposure ◽  
The Body ◽  
Exposure Level ◽  
Occupational Exposure Limits ◽  
Exposure Limits ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Cellulose Esters ◽  
Limit Values ◽  
Exposure Limit ◽  
Short Term Exposure

Nitroethane is a colorless oily liquid with a mild fruity odor. It is used mainly as a pro-pellant (e.g., fuel for rockets), and as a solvent or dissolvent agent for cellulose esters, resins (vinyl and alkyd) and waxes, and also in chemical synthesis.Occupational exposure to nitroethane may occur during the process of its production and processing. There are no data on air concentra-tions of nitroethane in occupational exposure. In 2010–2015, workers in Poland were not exposed to nitroethane concentrations exceed-ing the maximum allowable value – 75 mg/m3 (the limit value valid since 2010).Nitroethane can be absorbed into the body via inhalation of its vapors or by ingestion.The discussed cases of nitroethane acute poi-soning caused by an accidental ingestion of artificial fingernail remover containing pure nitroethane concerned children under three years. Few hours after ingestion, cyanosis and sporadic vomiting were observed in children. The methemoglobin level reached 40÷50%.Neither data on chronic nitroethane poisoning in humans nor data obtained from epidemio-logical studies are available.On the basis of the results of acute toxicity studies nitroethane has been categorized in the group of hazardous compounds. However, eye and dermal irritation or allergic effects have not been evidenced. The studies of sub-chronic (4 and 90 days) and chronic (2 years) exposure to nitroethane per-formed on rats and mice (concentration range 310 ÷ 12 400 mg/m3) revealed the methemo-globinogenic effect of this compound and a minor damage to liver, spleen, salivary gland and nasal turbinates.Niroethane has shown neither mutagenic nor carcinogenic effects. Its influence on fertility has not been evidenced either. After chronic exposure (2 years) of rats to ni-troethane at concentration of 525 mg/m3 (the lowest observed adverse effect level – LOAEL), a slight change in a body mass of exposed fe-male animals and subtle changes in biochemi-cal parameters were observed, but there were no anomalies in hematological and histopatho-logical examinations.The value of 62 mg/m3 has been suggested to be adopted as the MAC value for nitroethane after applying the LOAEL value of 525 mg/m3 and relevant coefficients of uncertainty. The STEL value for nitroethane was proposed ac-cording to the methodology for determining short term exposure level value for irritating substances as three times MAC value (186 mg/m3) to prevent the effects of sensory irri-tations in humans. Because of its methemoglo-binogenic effect, 2% Met-Hb has been suggest-ed to be adopted as the value of biological ex-posure index (BEI), like the value already adopted for all methemoglobinogenic sub-stances.The Scientific Committee on Occupational Exposure Limits (SCOEL) proposed the time-weighted average (TWA) for nitroethane (8 h) as 62 mg/m3 (20 ppm), short-term exposure limit (STEL, 15 min) as 312 mg/m3 (100 ppm) and “skin” notation.Proposed OEL and STEL values for nitroethane were subjected to public consultation, con-ducted in 2011 by contact points, during which Poland did not raise any objections to the pro-posals. The proposed values for nitroethane by SCOEL has been adopted by the Advisory Committee on Safety and Health at Work UE (ACSH) and included in the draft directive establishing the IV list of indicative occupa-tional exposure limit values.

The activity of the Interdepartmental Commission for Maximum Admissible Concentrations and Intensities for Agents Harmful to Health in the Working Environment in 2018 and the work plan in 2019

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (1(99)) ◽  
pp. 77-87
Author(s):  
Danuta Koradecka ◽  
Jolanta Skowroń
Keyword(s):  
Occupational Exposure ◽  
Working Environment ◽  
Concentration Limit ◽  
Exposure Limits ◽  
Limit Values ◽  
Maximum Admissible Concentration ◽  
Exposure Limit ◽  
Copper Mines ◽  
Interdepartmental Commission

In 2018 the Commission met at three sessions, during which 9 documentations for recommended exposure limits of chemical substances, were discussed. Moreover the Commission discussed on: a system for notifying entrepreneurs, employees and inspection bodies of proposals for new or verified binding values (for carcinogenic and mutagenic substances) or indicator values for harmful chemicals in the form of messages, rules for setting limit values for harmful to health chemicals in the working environment, a program to improve working conditions in copper mines of KGHM Polska Miedź SA. and the methodology for determining hygiene standards for active substances of cytostatics, taking into account the uncertainty factor "F". The Commission suggested to the Minister of Family, Labour and Social Policy the following changes in the list of MAC values: adaptation of the Polish list of maximum admissible concentration (MAC-NDS) to Directive 2019/130/EC of 31/1/2019 amending Directive 2004/37/EC on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to carcinogens or mutagens at work (these are: chloroethene, o-toluidine and 1,3-butadiene), adjusting the MAC-value for trimethylamine to the value included in the draft directive setting the fifth list of indicative occupational exposure limits, introducing changes in the list of the maximum admissible concentration of chemicals and dust harmful to health for the substances mentioned, introduce the following substances into the list of maximum admissible concentrations of chemical agents harmful to health: phenolphthalein (Carc. 1B), etoposide (Carc. 1B), fluorouracil (Muta. 1B, skin), 2-nitroanisole (Carc. 1B), N-nitrosodimethylamine (Carc. 1B). Four issues of the "Principles and Methods of Assessing the Working Environment" were published in 2018. The booklets included: 11 documentation of occupational exposure limit, 11 methods for the determination of chemical concentrations in the working environment, 4 articles, a report on the activities of the Interdepartmental Commission for MACs and MAIs in 2017 and the indexes of the documentations, methods and articles published between 2000-2018. Three sessions of the Commission are planned for 2019. MAC values for 10 chemicals substances will be discussed at these meetings. The Commission and the Group of Experts will continue to work on adapting the Polish list of the maximum admissible concentrations to: proposals for binding values for carcinogenic or mutagenic substances, proposed concentration limit values developed by the Committee for Risk Assessment (RAC) and work carried out at SCOEL.

Governing Occupational Exposure Using Thresholds: A Policy Biased Toward Industry

2021 ◽  
pp. 016224392110153
Author(s):  
Emmanuel Henry
Keyword(s):  
Occupational Exposure ◽  
Boundary Object ◽  
Power Dynamics ◽  
Occupational Exposure Limits ◽  
Exposure Limits ◽  
Limit Values ◽  
Threshold Limit Values ◽  
Scientific Expertise ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Scientific Rationale

Strongly grounded in scientific knowledge, the instrument known as occupational exposure limits or threshold limit values has changed government modalities of exposure to hazardous chemicals in workplaces, transforming both the substance of the problem at hand and the power dynamics between the actors involved. Some of the characteristics of this instrument favor the interests of industries at the expense of employees, their representatives, and the authorities in charge of regulating these risks. First, this instrument can be analyzed as a boundary object that has very different uses in space and time. In particular, it is increasingly masking its industrial origins to appear as an instrument that is almost exclusively based on scientific rationale. In the case of asbestos and its substitutes, the use of an instrument relying on scientific expertise generates a specific temporality of implementation that allows manufacturers to take advantage of periods during which regulations are either nonexistent or very loose. Finally, the choice of a technoscientific definition of the issues contributes to shifting the negotiations to a field where companies are in a position of strength and their opponents are weakened.

scholarly journals Possible hazards of work environment in metal processing industry in Latvia

2010 ◽  
Vol 64 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 61-65
Author(s):  
Inese Mārtiņsone ◽  
Mārīte-Ārija Baķe ◽  
Žanna Martinsone ◽  
Maija Eglīte
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Occupational Exposure ◽  
Work Environment ◽  
Occupational Safety ◽  
Poor Quality ◽  
Occupational Exposure Limits ◽  
Exposure Limits ◽  
Processing Industry ◽  
Metal Processing ◽  
Metal Processing Industry

Possible hazards of work environment in metal processing industry in Latvia The aim of this study was to investigate risk factors in the work environment of Latvian metal processing industry using the database of the Laboratory of Hygiene and Occupational Diseases of the Institute of Occupational Safety and Environmental Health, Rīga Stradiņš University. During the period between 1996 and 2005, 703 measurements were made in metalworking enterprises. In Latvia, approximately 2.4% of the workforce is involved in the metal processing industry. Physical (noise, lighting, vibration) and chemical (abrasive dust, welding aerosol and contained metals) risk factors were analysed. In the assessed metalworking workplaces, the work environment was estimated to be of poor quality, because occupational exposure limits or recommended values were exceeded in 42% (n = 294) of cases. Noise, manganese and welding aerosols most often exceeded the occupational exposure limits or recommended values, the significance was P < 0.001, P < 0.01 and P < 0.05, respectively.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document