Cargando…

Health Impact Assessment of Volcanic Ash Inhalation: A Comparison With Outdoor Air Pollution Methods

This paper critically appraises the extrapolation of concentration‐response functions (CRFs) for fine and coarse particulate matter, PM(2.5) and PM(10), respectively, used in outdoor air pollution health impact assessment (HIA) studies to assess the extent of health impacts in communities exposed to...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mueller, William, Cowie, Hilary, Horwell, Claire J., Hurley, Fintan, Baxter, Peter J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7334379/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32642627
http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2020GH000256
_version_ 1783553920846528512
author Mueller, William
Cowie, Hilary
Horwell, Claire J.
Hurley, Fintan
Baxter, Peter J.
author_facet Mueller, William
Cowie, Hilary
Horwell, Claire J.
Hurley, Fintan
Baxter, Peter J.
author_sort Mueller, William
collection PubMed
description This paper critically appraises the extrapolation of concentration‐response functions (CRFs) for fine and coarse particulate matter, PM(2.5) and PM(10), respectively, used in outdoor air pollution health impact assessment (HIA) studies to assess the extent of health impacts in communities exposed to volcanic emissions. Treating volcanic ash as PM, we (1) consider existing models for HIA for general outdoor PM, (2) identify documented health effects from exposure to ash in volcanic eruptions, (3) discuss potential issues of applying CRFs based on the composition and concentration of ash‐related PM, and (4) critically review available case studies of volcanic exposure scenarios utilizing HIA for outdoor air pollution. We identify a number of small‐scale studies focusing on populations exposed to volcanic ash; exposure is rarely quantified, and there is limited evidence concerning the health effects of PM from volcanic eruptions. That limited evidence is, however, consistent with the CRFs typically used for outdoor air pollution HIA. Two health assessments of exposure to volcanic emissions have been published using population‐ and occupational‐based CRFs, though each application entails distinct assumptions and limitations. We conclude that the best available strategy, at present, is to apply outdoor air pollution risk estimates to scenarios involving volcanic ash emissions for the purposes of HIA. However, due to the knowledge gaps on, for example, the health effects from exposure to volcanic ash and differences in ash composition, there is inherent uncertainty in this application. To conclude, we suggest actions to enable better prediction and assessment of health impacts of volcanic emissions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7334379
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73343792020-07-07 Health Impact Assessment of Volcanic Ash Inhalation: A Comparison With Outdoor Air Pollution Methods Mueller, William Cowie, Hilary Horwell, Claire J. Hurley, Fintan Baxter, Peter J. Geohealth Research Articles This paper critically appraises the extrapolation of concentration‐response functions (CRFs) for fine and coarse particulate matter, PM(2.5) and PM(10), respectively, used in outdoor air pollution health impact assessment (HIA) studies to assess the extent of health impacts in communities exposed to volcanic emissions. Treating volcanic ash as PM, we (1) consider existing models for HIA for general outdoor PM, (2) identify documented health effects from exposure to ash in volcanic eruptions, (3) discuss potential issues of applying CRFs based on the composition and concentration of ash‐related PM, and (4) critically review available case studies of volcanic exposure scenarios utilizing HIA for outdoor air pollution. We identify a number of small‐scale studies focusing on populations exposed to volcanic ash; exposure is rarely quantified, and there is limited evidence concerning the health effects of PM from volcanic eruptions. That limited evidence is, however, consistent with the CRFs typically used for outdoor air pollution HIA. Two health assessments of exposure to volcanic emissions have been published using population‐ and occupational‐based CRFs, though each application entails distinct assumptions and limitations. We conclude that the best available strategy, at present, is to apply outdoor air pollution risk estimates to scenarios involving volcanic ash emissions for the purposes of HIA. However, due to the knowledge gaps on, for example, the health effects from exposure to volcanic ash and differences in ash composition, there is inherent uncertainty in this application. To conclude, we suggest actions to enable better prediction and assessment of health impacts of volcanic emissions. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-07-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7334379/ /pubmed/32642627 http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2020GH000256 Text en ©2020. The Authors. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Research Articles
Mueller, William
Cowie, Hilary
Horwell, Claire J.
Hurley, Fintan
Baxter, Peter J.
Health Impact Assessment of Volcanic Ash Inhalation: A Comparison With Outdoor Air Pollution Methods
title Health Impact Assessment of Volcanic Ash Inhalation: A Comparison With Outdoor Air Pollution Methods
title_full Health Impact Assessment of Volcanic Ash Inhalation: A Comparison With Outdoor Air Pollution Methods
title_fullStr Health Impact Assessment of Volcanic Ash Inhalation: A Comparison With Outdoor Air Pollution Methods
title_full_unstemmed Health Impact Assessment of Volcanic Ash Inhalation: A Comparison With Outdoor Air Pollution Methods
title_short Health Impact Assessment of Volcanic Ash Inhalation: A Comparison With Outdoor Air Pollution Methods
title_sort health impact assessment of volcanic ash inhalation: a comparison with outdoor air pollution methods
topic Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7334379/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32642627
http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2020GH000256
work_keys_str_mv AT muellerwilliam healthimpactassessmentofvolcanicashinhalationacomparisonwithoutdoorairpollutionmethods
AT cowiehilary healthimpactassessmentofvolcanicashinhalationacomparisonwithoutdoorairpollutionmethods
AT horwellclairej healthimpactassessmentofvolcanicashinhalationacomparisonwithoutdoorairpollutionmethods
AT hurleyfintan healthimpactassessmentofvolcanicashinhalationacomparisonwithoutdoorairpollutionmethods
AT baxterpeterj healthimpactassessmentofvolcanicashinhalationacomparisonwithoutdoorairpollutionmethods