Cargando…

Evaluation and Application of the RD(50) for Determining Acceptable Exposure Levels of Airborne Sensory Irritants for the General Public

BACKGROUND: The RD(50) (exposure concentration producing a 50% respiratory rate decrease) test evaluates airborne chemicals for sensory irritation and has become an American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) standard method. Past studies reported good correlations (R(2)) between RD(50)s and t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kuwabara, Yu, Alexeeff, George V., Broadwin, Rachel, Salmon, Andrew G.
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences 2007
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2072859/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18007993
http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.9848
_version_ 1782137798028951552
author Kuwabara, Yu
Alexeeff, George V.
Broadwin, Rachel
Salmon, Andrew G.
author_facet Kuwabara, Yu
Alexeeff, George V.
Broadwin, Rachel
Salmon, Andrew G.
author_sort Kuwabara, Yu
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The RD(50) (exposure concentration producing a 50% respiratory rate decrease) test evaluates airborne chemicals for sensory irritation and has become an American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) standard method. Past studies reported good correlations (R(2)) between RD(50)s and the occupational exposure limits, particularly threshold limit values (TLVs). OBJECTIVE: The main purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between RD(50)s and human sensory irritation responses in a quantitative manner, particularly for chemicals that produce burning sensation of the eyes, nose, or throat, based on lowest observed adverse effect levels (LOAELs) reported for human subjects. METHODS: We compared RD(50)s with LOAELs and acute reference exposure levels (RELs). RELs, developed by the California Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, represent a level at which no adverse effects are anticipated after exposure. We collected RD(50)s from the published literature and evaluated them for consistency with ASTM procedures. We identified LOAELs for human irritation and found 25 chemicals with a corresponding RD(50) in mice. DISCUSSION: We found the relationship between RD(50)s and LOAELs as log RD(50) = 1.16 (log LOAEL) + 0.77 with an R(2) value of 0.80. This strong correlation supports the use of the RD(50) in establishing exposure limits for the public. We further identified 16 chemical irritants with both RD(50)s and corresponding acute RELs, and calculated the relationship as log RD(50) = 0.71 (log REL) + 2.55 with an R(2) value of 0.71. This relationship could be used to identify health protective values for the public to prevent respiratory or sensory irritation. CONCLUSION: Consequently, we believe that the RD(50) has benefits for use in setting protective levels for the health of both workers and the general population.
format Text
id pubmed-2072859
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2007
publisher National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-20728592007-11-14 Evaluation and Application of the RD(50) for Determining Acceptable Exposure Levels of Airborne Sensory Irritants for the General Public Kuwabara, Yu Alexeeff, George V. Broadwin, Rachel Salmon, Andrew G. Environ Health Perspect Research BACKGROUND: The RD(50) (exposure concentration producing a 50% respiratory rate decrease) test evaluates airborne chemicals for sensory irritation and has become an American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) standard method. Past studies reported good correlations (R(2)) between RD(50)s and the occupational exposure limits, particularly threshold limit values (TLVs). OBJECTIVE: The main purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between RD(50)s and human sensory irritation responses in a quantitative manner, particularly for chemicals that produce burning sensation of the eyes, nose, or throat, based on lowest observed adverse effect levels (LOAELs) reported for human subjects. METHODS: We compared RD(50)s with LOAELs and acute reference exposure levels (RELs). RELs, developed by the California Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, represent a level at which no adverse effects are anticipated after exposure. We collected RD(50)s from the published literature and evaluated them for consistency with ASTM procedures. We identified LOAELs for human irritation and found 25 chemicals with a corresponding RD(50) in mice. DISCUSSION: We found the relationship between RD(50)s and LOAELs as log RD(50) = 1.16 (log LOAEL) + 0.77 with an R(2) value of 0.80. This strong correlation supports the use of the RD(50) in establishing exposure limits for the public. We further identified 16 chemical irritants with both RD(50)s and corresponding acute RELs, and calculated the relationship as log RD(50) = 0.71 (log REL) + 2.55 with an R(2) value of 0.71. This relationship could be used to identify health protective values for the public to prevent respiratory or sensory irritation. CONCLUSION: Consequently, we believe that the RD(50) has benefits for use in setting protective levels for the health of both workers and the general population. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences 2007-11 2007-08-07 /pmc/articles/PMC2072859/ /pubmed/18007993 http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.9848 Text en http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/ Publication of EHP lies in the public domain and is therefore without copyright. All text from EHP may be reprinted freely. Use of materials published in EHP should be acknowledged (for example, ?Reproduced with permission from Environmental Health Perspectives?); pertinent reference information should be provided for the article from which the material was reproduced. Articles from EHP, especially the News section, may contain photographs or illustrations copyrighted by other commercial organizations or individuals that may not be used without obtaining prior approval from the holder of the copyright.
spellingShingle Research
Kuwabara, Yu
Alexeeff, George V.
Broadwin, Rachel
Salmon, Andrew G.
Evaluation and Application of the RD(50) for Determining Acceptable Exposure Levels of Airborne Sensory Irritants for the General Public
title Evaluation and Application of the RD(50) for Determining Acceptable Exposure Levels of Airborne Sensory Irritants for the General Public
title_full Evaluation and Application of the RD(50) for Determining Acceptable Exposure Levels of Airborne Sensory Irritants for the General Public
title_fullStr Evaluation and Application of the RD(50) for Determining Acceptable Exposure Levels of Airborne Sensory Irritants for the General Public
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation and Application of the RD(50) for Determining Acceptable Exposure Levels of Airborne Sensory Irritants for the General Public
title_short Evaluation and Application of the RD(50) for Determining Acceptable Exposure Levels of Airborne Sensory Irritants for the General Public
title_sort evaluation and application of the rd(50) for determining acceptable exposure levels of airborne sensory irritants for the general public
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2072859/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18007993
http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.9848
work_keys_str_mv AT kuwabarayu evaluationandapplicationoftherd50fordeterminingacceptableexposurelevelsofairbornesensoryirritantsforthegeneralpublic
AT alexeeffgeorgev evaluationandapplicationoftherd50fordeterminingacceptableexposurelevelsofairbornesensoryirritantsforthegeneralpublic
AT broadwinrachel evaluationandapplicationoftherd50fordeterminingacceptableexposurelevelsofairbornesensoryirritantsforthegeneralpublic
AT salmonandrewg evaluationandapplicationoftherd50fordeterminingacceptableexposurelevelsofairbornesensoryirritantsforthegeneralpublic