John Cherrie

Publications

• 6.19

  Impact points

  An integrated approach to the exposome.

  Martie van Tongeren, John W Cherrie

  Environmental health perspectives. 03/2012; 120(3):A103-4; author reply A104.
• 2.23

  Impact points

  Exposure assessment of tetrafluoroethylene and ammonium perfluorooctanoate 1951-2002.

  Anne Sleeuwenhoek, John W Cherrie

  Journal of environmental monitoring : JEM. 03/2012; 14(3):775-81.

  To develop a method to reconstruct exposure to tetrafluoroethylene (TFE) and ammonium perfluorooctanoate (APFO) in plants producing polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) in the absence of suitable objective measurements. These data were used to inform an epidemiological study being carried out to investiga... [more] To develop a method to reconstruct exposure to tetrafluoroethylene (TFE) and ammonium perfluorooctanoate (APFO) in plants producing polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) in the absence of suitable objective measurements. These data were used to inform an epidemiological study being carried out to investigate possible risks in workers employed in the manufacture of PTFE and to study trends in exposure over time. For each plant, detailed descriptions of all occupational titles, including tasks and changes over time, were obtained during semi-structured interviews with key plant personnel. A semi-quantitative assessment method was used to assess inhalation exposure to TFE and inhalation plus dermal exposure to APFO. Temporal trends in exposure to TFE and APFO were investigated. In each plant the highest exposures for both TFE and APFO occurred in the polymerisation area. Due to the introduction of control measures, increasing process automation and other improvements, exposures generally decreased over time. In the polymerisation area, the annual decline in exposure to TFE varied by plant from 3.8 to 5.7% and for APFO from 2.2 to 5.5%. A simple method for assessing exposure was developed which used detailed process information and job descriptions to estimate average annual TFE and APFO exposure on an arbitrary semi-quantitative scale. These semi-quantitative estimates are sufficient to identify relative differences in exposure for the epidemiological study and should good data become available, they could be used to provide quantitative estimates for all plants across the whole period of operation.
• 1.91

  Impact points

  Exposure to grain dust in Great Britain.

  Sally Spankie, John W Cherrie

  The Annals of occupational hygiene. 01/2012; 56(1):25-36.

  Airborne grain dust is a complex mixture of fragments of organic material from grain, plus mineral matter from soil, and possible insect, fungal, or bacterial contamination or their toxic products, such as endotoxin. In the 1990s, grain workers in Britain were frequently exposed to inhalable dust &g... [more] Airborne grain dust is a complex mixture of fragments of organic material from grain, plus mineral matter from soil, and possible insect, fungal, or bacterial contamination or their toxic products, such as endotoxin. In the 1990s, grain workers in Britain were frequently exposed to inhalable dust >10 mg.m(-3) (8 h), with particularly high exposures being found at terminals where grain was imported or exported and in drying operations (personal exposure typically approximately 20 mg.m(-3)). Since then, the industry has made substantial progress in improving the control of airborne dust through better-designed processes, increased automation, and an improved focus on product quality. We have used information from the published scientific literature and a small survey of industry representatives to estimate current exposure levels. These data suggest that current long-term exposure to inhalable dust for most workers is on average less than approximately 3 mg.m(-3), with perhaps 15-20% of individual personal exposures being >10 mg.m(-3). There are no published data from Britain on short-term exposure during cleaning and other tasks. We have estimated average levels for a range of tasks and judge that the highest levels, for example during some cleaning activities and certain process tasks such as loading and packing, are probably approximately10 mg.m(-3). Endotoxin levels were judged likely to be <10⁴ EU m(-3) throughout the industry provided inhalable dust levels are <10 mg.m(-3). There are no published exposure data on mycotoxin, respirable crystalline silica, and mite contamination but these are not considered to present widespread problems in the British industry. Further research should be carried out to confirm these findings.
• 2.22

  Impact points

  Biological monitoring of pesticide exposures in residents living near agricultural land.

  Karen S Galea, Laura MacCalman, Kate Jones, John Cocker, Paul Teedon, Anne J Sleeuwenhoek, John W Cherrie, Martie van Tongeren

  BMC public health. 11/2011; 11:856.

  There is currently a lack of reliable information on the exposures of residents and bystanders to pesticides in the UK. Previous research has shown that the methods currently used for assessing pesticide exposure for regulatory purposes are appropriate for farm workers 1. However, there were indicat... [more] There is currently a lack of reliable information on the exposures of residents and bystanders to pesticides in the UK. Previous research has shown that the methods currently used for assessing pesticide exposure for regulatory purposes are appropriate for farm workers 1. However, there were indications that the exposures of bystanders may sometimes be underestimated. The previous study did not collect data for residents. Therefore, this study aims to collect measurements to determine if the current methods and tools are appropriate for assessing pesticide exposure for residents living near agricultural fields. The study will recruit owners of farms and orchards (hereafter both will be referred to as farms) that spray their agricultural crops with certain specified pesticides, and which have residential areas in close proximity to these fields. Recruited farms will be asked to provide details of their pesticide usage throughout the spray season. Informed consenting residents (adults (18 years and over) and children (aged 4-12 years)) will be asked to provide urine samples and accompanying activity diaries during the spraying season and in addition for a limited number of weeks before/after the spray season to allow background pesticide metabolite levels to be determined. Selected urine samples will be analysed for the pesticide metabolites of interest. Statistical analysis and mathematical modelling will use the laboratory results, along with the additional data collected from the farmers and residents, to determine systemic exposure levels amongst residents. Surveys will be carried out in selected areas of the United Kingdom over two years (2011 and 2012), covering two spraying seasons and the time between the spraying seasons. The described study protocol was implemented for the sample and data collection procedures carried out in 2011. Based on experience to date, no major changes to the protocol are anticipated for the 2012 spray season although the pesticides and regional areas for inclusion in 2012 are still to be confirmed.
• 1.91

  Impact points

  Advanced REACH Tool: development and application of the substance emission potential modifying factor.

  Martie van Tongeren, Wouter Fransman, Sally Spankie, Martin Tischer, Derk Brouwer, Jody Schinkel, John W Cherrie, Erik Tielemans

  The Annals of occupational hygiene. 11/2011; 55(9):980-8.

  The Advanced REACH Tool (ART) is an exposure assessment tool that combines mechanistically modelled inhalation exposure estimates with available exposure data using a Bayesian approach. The mechanistic model is based on nine independent principal modifying factors (MF). One of these MF is the substa... [more] The Advanced REACH Tool (ART) is an exposure assessment tool that combines mechanistically modelled inhalation exposure estimates with available exposure data using a Bayesian approach. The mechanistic model is based on nine independent principal modifying factors (MF). One of these MF is the substance emission potential, which addresses the intrinsic substance properties as determinants of the emission from a source. This paper describes the current knowledge and evidence on intrinsic characteristics of solids and liquids that determine the potential for their release into workplace air. The principal factor determining the release of aerosols from handling or processing powdered, granular, or pelletized materials is the dustiness of the material, as well as the weight fraction of the substance of interest in the powder and the moisture content. The partial vapour pressure is the main intrinsic factor determining the substance emission potential for emission of vapours. For generation of mist, the substance emission potential is determined by the viscosity of the liquid as well as the weight fraction of the substance of interest in the liquid. Within ART release of vapours is considered for substances with a partial vapour pressure at the process temperature of 10 Pa or more, while mist formation is considered for substances with a vapour pressure ≤ 10 Pa. Relative multipliers are assigned for most of the intrinsic factors, with the exception of the weight fraction and the vapour pressure, which is applied as a continuous variable in the estimation of the substance emission potential. Currently, estimation of substance emission potential is not available for fumes, fibres, and gases. The substance emission potential takes account of the latest thinking on emissions of dusts, mists, and vapours and in our view provides a good balance between theory and pragmatism. Expanding the knowledge base on substance emission potential will improve the predictive power of occupational exposure models and thereby the accuracy and precision of the exposure estimates.
• 1.91

  Impact points

  Revisiting the effect of room size and general ventilation on the relationship between near- and far-field air concentrations.

  John W Cherrie, Laura Maccalman, Wouter Fransman, Erik Tielemans, Martin Tischer, Martie Van Tongeren

  The Annals of occupational hygiene. 11/2011; 55(9):1006-15.

  In 1999, Cherrie carried out a series of mathematical simulations to investigate dispersion of pollutants through two indoor zones: the near-field (NF) and the far-field (FF). The results of these simulations were used to derive modifying factors for use in exposure modeling. However, in the origina... [more] In 1999, Cherrie carried out a series of mathematical simulations to investigate dispersion of pollutants through two indoor zones: the near-field (NF) and the far-field (FF). The results of these simulations were used to derive modifying factors for use in exposure modeling. However, in the original simulations, no account was taken of deposition on surfaces, either from sedimentation of aerosols or other mechanisms or the potential effects of intermittent or short duration sources. These factors may affect pollutant dispersion, particularly the relationship between NF and FF levels. The Advanced REACH Tool (ART) is based on a two-zone dispersion paradigm. Further simulations have been carried out to help ensure that the ART realistically reflects pollutant dispersion. Pollutant dispersion has been simulated using a two-compartment well-mixed box model to represent the NF and the FF. Simulations were repeated for a range of room sizes and ventilation conditions. Intermittent sources (e.g. batch processes) were simulated by having the source active for 1 h followed by a 1-h gap, while short duration work emissions were set to last for 10 min, 30 min, 1 h, or 4 h, within the working day. Deposition was modeled by adding an equivalent air exchange rate based on published research data. Simulations were undertaken for non-volatile, monodisperse aerosols of aerodynamic diameter: 0.3, 1, 3, 10, 30, and 100 μm and the results were then interpreted in terms of typical polydisperse industrial aerosols. Room size and general ventilation strongly influenced dispersion from the NF to the FF as Cherrie had originally found. When varying the duration of the simulation, the biggest difference from continuous work was seen in small poorly ventilated rooms, with the ratio of the NF to FF concentration for 1-h work in the smallest room and lowest air exchange rate being a fifth of that calculated for continuous work. For large rooms and high general ventilation rates, the duration of the activity made little difference to dispersion. The results suggest that for the purposes of dispersion intermittent batch work is equivalent to continuous work. For typical simulated poly-disperse aerosols, the main effect of aerosol deposition was to reduce the predicted high concentrations compared to vapours when working in confined spaces. Both short duration of source emissions and deposition of aerosols have an important effect on dispersion, and the results from this study have been reflected in the ART model.
• 1.91

  Impact points

  Advanced Reach Tool (ART): development of the mechanistic model.

  Wouter Fransman, Martie Van Tongeren, John W Cherrie, Martin Tischer, Thomas Schneider, Jody Schinkel, Hans Kromhout, Nick Warren, Henk Goede, Erik Tielemans

  The Annals of occupational hygiene. 11/2011; 55(9):957-79.

  This paper describes the development of the mechanistic model within a collaborative project, referred to as the Advanced REACH Tool (ART) project, to develop a tool to model inhalation exposure for workers sharing similar operational conditions across different industries and locations in Europe. T... [more] This paper describes the development of the mechanistic model within a collaborative project, referred to as the Advanced REACH Tool (ART) project, to develop a tool to model inhalation exposure for workers sharing similar operational conditions across different industries and locations in Europe. The ART mechanistic model is based on a conceptual framework that adopts a source receptor approach, which describes the transport of a contaminant from the source to the receptor and defines seven independent principal modifying factors: substance emission potential, activity emission potential, localized controls, segregation, personal enclosure, surface contamination, and dispersion. ART currently differentiates between three different exposure types: vapours, mists, and dust (fumes, fibres, and gases are presently excluded). Various sources were used to assign numerical values to the multipliers to each modifying factor. The evidence used to underpin this assessment procedure was based on chemical and physical laws. In addition, empirical data obtained from literature were used. Where this was not possible, expert elicitation was applied for the assessment procedure. Multipliers for all modifying factors were peer reviewed by leading experts from industry, research institutes, and public authorities across the globe. In addition, several workshops with experts were organized to discuss the proposed exposure multipliers. The mechanistic model is a central part of the ART tool and with advancing knowledge on exposure, determinants will require updates and refinements on a continuous basis, such as the effect of worker behaviour on personal exposure, 'best practice' values that describe the maximum achievable effectiveness of control measures, the intrinsic emission potential of various solid objects (e.g. metal, glass, plastics, etc.), and extending the applicability domain to certain types of exposures (e.g. gas, fume, and fibre exposure).
• 1.91

  Impact points

  Advanced REACH Tool (ART): overview of version 1.0 and research needs.

  Erik Tielemans, Nick Warren, Wouter Fransman, Martie Van Tongeren, Kevin McNally, Martin Tischer, Peter Ritchie, Hans Kromhout, Jody Schinkel, Thomas Schneider, John W Cherrie

  The Annals of occupational hygiene. 11/2011; 55(9):949-56.

  This paper provides an outline of the Advanced REACH Tool (ART) version 1.0 and a discussion of how it could be further developed. ART is a higher tier exposure assessment tool that combines mechanistically modelled inhalation exposure predictions with available exposure data using a Bayesian approa... [more] This paper provides an outline of the Advanced REACH Tool (ART) version 1.0 and a discussion of how it could be further developed. ART is a higher tier exposure assessment tool that combines mechanistically modelled inhalation exposure predictions with available exposure data using a Bayesian approach. ART assesses exposure for scenarios across different plants and sites. Estimates are provided for different percentiles of the exposure distribution and confidence intervals around the estimate. It also produces exposure estimates in the absence of data, but uncertainty of the estimates will decrease when results of exposure measurements are included. The tool has been calibrated using a broad range of exposure data and provides estimates for exposure to vapours, mists, and dusts. ART has a robust and stable conceptual basis but will be refined in the future and should therefore be considered an evolving system. High-priority areas for future research are identified in this paper and include the integration of partially analogous measurement series, inclusion of company and site-specific assessments, user decision strategies linked to ART predictions, evaluation of validity and reliability of ART, exploring the possibilities for incorporating the dermal route and integration of ART predictions with tools for modelling internal dose. ART is initially developed in the scope of REACH but is equally useful for exposure assessment in other areas.
• 1.91

  Impact points

  Classification of occupational activities for assessment of inhalation exposure.

  Hans Marquart, Thomas Schneider, Henk Goede, Martin Tischer, Jody Schinkel, Nick Warren, Wouter Fransman, Suzanne Spaan, Martie Van Tongeren, Hans Kromhout, Erik Tielemans, John W Cherrie

  The Annals of occupational hygiene. 09/2011; 55(9):989-1005.

  There is a large variety of activities in workplaces that can lead to emission of substances. Coding systems based on determinants of emission have so far not been developed. In this paper, a system of Activity Classes and Activity Subclasses is proposed for categorizing activities involving chemica... [more] There is a large variety of activities in workplaces that can lead to emission of substances. Coding systems based on determinants of emission have so far not been developed. In this paper, a system of Activity Classes and Activity Subclasses is proposed for categorizing activities involving chemical use. Activity Classes share their so-called 'emission generation mechanisms' and physical state of the product handled and the underlying determinants of emission. A number of (industrial) stakeholders actively participated in testing and fine-tuning the system. With the help of these stakeholders, it was found to be relatively easy to allocate a large number of activities to the Activity Classes and Activity Subclasses. The system facilitates a more structured classification of activities in exposure databases, a structured analysis of the analogy of exposure activities, and a transparent quantification of the activity emission potential in (new) exposure assessment models. The first use of the system is in the Advanced REACH Tool.
• 1.91

  Impact points

  Oil mist and vapour concentrations from drilling fluids: inter- and intra-laboratory comparison of chemical analyses.

  Karen S Galea, Alison Searl, Araceli Sánchez-Jiménez, Torill Woldbæk, Kristin Halgard, Syvert Thorud, Kjersti Steinsvåg, Kirsti Krüger, Laura Maccalman, John W Cherrie, Martie van Tongeren

  The Annals of occupational hygiene. 09/2011; 56(1):61-9.

  There are no recognized analytical methods for measuring oil mist and vapours arising from drilling fluids used in offshore petroleum drilling industry. To inform the future development of improved methods of analysis for oil mist and vapours this study assessed the inter- and intra-laboratory varia... [more] There are no recognized analytical methods for measuring oil mist and vapours arising from drilling fluids used in offshore petroleum drilling industry. To inform the future development of improved methods of analysis for oil mist and vapours this study assessed the inter- and intra-laboratory variability in oil mist and vapour analysis. In addition, sample losses during transportation and storage were assessed. Replicate samples for oil mist and vapour were collected using the 37-mm Millipore closed cassette and charcoal tube assembly. Sampling was conducted in a simulated shale shaker room, similar to that found offshore for processing drilling fluids. Samples were analysed at two different laboratories, one in Norway and one in the UK. Oil mist samples were analysed using Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), while oil vapour samples were analysed by gas chromatography (GC). The comparison of replicate samples showed substantial within- and between-laboratory variability in reported oil mist concentrations. The variability in oil vapour results was considerably reduced compared to oil mist, provided that a common method of calibration and quantification was adopted. The study also showed that losses can occur during transportation and storage of samples. There is a need to develop a harmonized method for the quantification of oil mist on filter and oil vapour on charcoal supported by a suitable proficiency testing scheme for laboratories involved in the analysis of occupational hygiene samples for the petroleum industry. The uncertainties in oil mist and vapour measurement have substantial implications in relation to compliance with occupational exposure limits and also in the reliability of any exposure-response information reported in epidemiological studies.
• 2.23

  Impact points

  Comparison of the SidePak personal monitor with the Aerosol Particle Sizer (APS).

  Araceli Sánchez Jiménez, Martie van Tongeren, Karen S Galea, Kjersti Steinsvåg, Laura MacCalman, John W Cherrie

  Journal of environmental monitoring : JEM. 06/2011; 13(6):1841-6.

  The aim of this study was to compare the performance of the TSI Aerodynamic Particle Sizer (APS) and the TSI portable photometer SidePak to measure airborne oil mist particulate matter (PM) with aerodynamic diameters below 10 μm, 2.5 μm and 1 μm (PM(10), PM(2.5) and PM(1)). Three SidePaks each fitte... [more] The aim of this study was to compare the performance of the TSI Aerodynamic Particle Sizer (APS) and the TSI portable photometer SidePak to measure airborne oil mist particulate matter (PM) with aerodynamic diameters below 10 μm, 2.5 μm and 1 μm (PM(10), PM(2.5) and PM(1)). Three SidePaks each fitted with either a PM(10), PM(2.5) or a PM(1) impactor and an APS were run side by side in a controlled chamber. Oil mist from two different mineral oils and two different drilling fluid systems commonly used in offshore drilling technologies were generated using a nebulizer. Compared to the APS, the SidePaks overestimated the concentration of PM(10) and PM(2.5) by one order of magnitude and PM(1) concentrations by two orders of magnitude after exposure to oil mist for 3.3-6.5 min at concentrations ranging from 0.003 to 18.1 mg m(-3) for PM(10), 0.002 to 3.96 mg m(-3) for PM(2.5) and 0.001 to 0.418 mg m(-3) for PM(1) (as measured by the APS). In a second experiment a SidePak monitor previously exposed to oil mist overestimated PM(10) concentrations by 27% compared to measurements from another SidePak never exposed to oil mist. This could be a result of condensation of oil mist droplets in the optical system of the SidePak. The SidePak is a very useful instrument for personal monitoring in occupational hygiene due to its light weight and quiet pump. However, it may not be suitable for the measurement of particle concentrations from oil mist.
• 2.23

  Impact points

  Validation of the inhalable dust algorithm of the Advanced REACH Tool using a dataset from the pharmaceutical industry.

  Patricia E Mc Donnell, Jody M Schinkel, Marie A Coggins, Wouter Fransman, Hans Kromhout, John W Cherrie, Erik L Tielemans

  Journal of environmental monitoring : JEM. 06/2011; 13(6):1597-606.

  As it is often difficult to obtain sufficient numbers of measurements to adequately characterise exposure levels, occupational exposure models may be useful tools in the exposure assessment process. This study aims to refine and validate the inhalable dust algorithm of the Advanced REACH Tool (ART) ... [more] As it is often difficult to obtain sufficient numbers of measurements to adequately characterise exposure levels, occupational exposure models may be useful tools in the exposure assessment process. This study aims to refine and validate the inhalable dust algorithm of the Advanced REACH Tool (ART) to predict airborne exposure of workers in the pharmaceutical industry. The ART was refined to reflect pharmaceutical situations. Largely task based workplace exposure data (n = 192) were collated from a multinational pharmaceutical company with exposure levels ranging from 5 × 10(-5) to 12 mg m(-3). Bias, relative bias and uncertainty around geometric mean exposure estimates were calculated for 16 exposure scenarios. For 12 of the 16 scenarios the ART geometric mean exposure estimates were lower than measured exposure levels with on average, a one-third underestimation of exposure (relative bias -32%). For 75% of the scenarios the exposure estimates were, within the 90% uncertainty factor of 4.4, as reported for the original calibration study, which may indicate more uncertainty in the ART estimates in this industry. While the uncertainty was higher than expected this is likely due to the limited number of measurements per scenario, which were largely derived from single premises.
• 2.76

  Impact points

  Authors' reply to Kundi's comments on de Vocht et al. "time trends (1998-2007) in brain cancer incidence rates in relation to mobile phone use in England"

  Frank de Vocht, Igor Burstyn, John W Cherrie

  Bioelectromagnetics. 05/2011;
• 1.91

  Impact points

  An assessment of dermal exposure to heavy fuel oil (HFO) in occupational settings.

  Yvette Christopher, Martie Van Tongeren, Jan Urbanus, John W Cherrie

  The Annals of occupational hygiene. 04/2011; 55(3):319-28.

  Heavy fuel oil (HFO) components are a group of heavy petroleum streams produced in oil refineries from crude oil. Due to its physicochemical properties, the dermal route is an important route of exposure. However, no information on dermal exposure levels for HFO has previously been published. A meth... [more] Heavy fuel oil (HFO) components are a group of heavy petroleum streams produced in oil refineries from crude oil. Due to its physicochemical properties, the dermal route is an important route of exposure. However, no information on dermal exposure levels for HFO has previously been published. A method for measuring dermal HFO levels was developed using wipe sampling and measuring phenanthrene and naphthalene as markers of HFO exposure. Measurement surveys were carried out in four different types of facilities: oil refineries, distribution terminals, energy providers, and an engine building and repair company. Dermal wipe samples were collected from different anatomical regions: neck, hands, and forearms. The frequency of tasks with potential for dermal HFO exposure was generally low at these facilities, with the exception of the distribution terminals and the engine building and repair site. The geometric mean (GM) dermal load on the hands was ∼0.1 μg cm(-2) for both left and right hand and 0.013 and 0.019 μg cm(-2) for the left and right forearm, respectively. With one exception, all results from the neck samples were below the limit of detection. The highest dermal loads for the hands and forearms were found in the engine building and repair facility (hands: GM = 1.6 μg cm(-2); forearms: GM = 0.41 μg cm(-2)). The tasks with the highest dermal loads were the maintenance (hands: GM = 1.7 μg cm(-2)) and cleaning tasks (hands: GM = 0.24 μg cm(-2)). Actual dermal loads were low when compared with workplace dermal exposure measurements reported by other researchers for similar scenarios with other substances. This may be explained by high compliance of gloves use by workers during HFO handling tasks and likely avoidance of contact with HFO due to its high viscosity and the requirement to keep HFO at elevated temperatures during storage, transport, and use.
• 2.23

  Impact points

  Advanced REACH Tool (ART): calibration of the mechanistic model.

  Jody Schinkel, Nicholas Warren, Wouter Fransman, Martie van Tongeren, Patricia McDonnell, Eef Voogd, John W Cherrie, Martin Tischer, Hans Kromhout, Erik Tielemans

  Journal of environmental monitoring : JEM. 03/2011; 13(5):1374-82.

  The mechanistic model of the Advanced Reach Tool (ART) provides a relative ranking of exposure levels from different scenarios. The objectives of the calibration described in this paper are threefold: to study whether the mechanistic model scores are accurately ranked in relation to exposure measure... [more] The mechanistic model of the Advanced Reach Tool (ART) provides a relative ranking of exposure levels from different scenarios. The objectives of the calibration described in this paper are threefold: to study whether the mechanistic model scores are accurately ranked in relation to exposure measurements; to enable the mechanistic model to estimate actual exposure levels rather than relative scores; and to provide a method of quantifying model uncertainty. Stringent data quality guidelines were applied to the collated data. Linear mixed effects models were used to evaluate the association between relative ART model scores and measurements. A random scenario and company component of variance were introduced to reflect the model uncertainty. Stratified analyses were conducted for different forms of exposure (abrasive dust, dust, vapours and mists). In total more than 2000 good quality measurements were available for the calibration of the mechanistic model. The calibration showed that after calibration the mechanistic model of ART was able to estimate geometric mean (GM) exposure levels with 90% confidence for a given scenario to lie within a factor between two and six of the measured GM depending upon the form of exposure.
• 1.91

  Impact points

  Effect of drilling fluid systems and temperature on oil mist and vapour levels generated from shale shaker.

  Kjersti Steinsvåg, Karen S Galea, Kirsti Krüger, Vegard Peikli, Araceli Sánchez-Jiménez, Esther Sætvedt, Alison Searl, John W Cherrie, Martie van Tongeren

  The Annals of occupational hygiene. 01/2011; 55(4):347-56.

  Workers in the drilling section of the offshore petroleum industry are exposed to air pollutants generated by drilling fluids. Oil mist and oil vapour concentrations have been measured in the drilling fluid processing areas for decades; however, little work has been carried out to investigate exposu... [more] Workers in the drilling section of the offshore petroleum industry are exposed to air pollutants generated by drilling fluids. Oil mist and oil vapour concentrations have been measured in the drilling fluid processing areas for decades; however, little work has been carried out to investigate exposure determinants such as drilling fluid viscosity and temperature. A study was undertaken to investigate the effect of two different oil-based drilling fluid systems and their temperature on oil mist, oil vapour, and total volatile organic compounds (TVOC) levels in a simulated shale shaker room at a purpose-built test centre. Oil mist and oil vapour concentrations were sampled simultaneously using a sampling arrangement consisting of a Millipore closed cassette loaded with glass fibre and cellulose acetate filters attached to a backup charcoal tube. TVOCs were measured by a PhoCheck photo-ionization detector direct reading instrument. Concentrations of oil mist, oil vapour, and TVOC in the atmosphere surrounding the shale shaker were assessed during three separate test periods. Two oil-based drilling fluids, denoted 'System 2.0' and 'System 3.5', containing base oils with a viscosity of 2.0 and 3.3-3.7 mm(2) s(-1) at 40°C, respectively, were used at temperatures ranging from 40 to 75°C. In general, the System 2.0 yielded low oil mist levels, but high oil vapour concentrations, while the opposite was found for the System 3.5. Statistical significant differences between the drilling fluid systems were found for oil mist (P = 0.025),vapour (P < 0.001), and TVOC (P = 0.011). Increasing temperature increased the oil mist, oil vapour, and TVOC levels. Oil vapour levels at the test facility exceeded the Norwegian oil vapour occupational exposure limit (OEL) of 30 mg m(-3) when the drilling fluid temperature was ≥50°C. The practice of testing compliance of oil vapour exposure from drilling fluids systems containing base oils with viscosity of ≤2.0 mm(2) s(-1) at 40°C against the Norwegian oil vapour OEL is questioned since these base oils are very similar to white spirit. To reduce exposures, relevant technical control measures in this area are to cool the drilling fluid <50°C before it enters the shale shaker units, enclose shale shakers and related equipment, in addition to careful consideration of which fluid system to use.
• 2.23

  Impact points

  Refinement and validation of an exposure model for the pharmaceutical industry.

  Patricia E McDonnell, John W Cherrie, Anne Sleeuwenhoek, Andy Gilles, Marie A Coggins

  Journal of environmental monitoring : JEM. 01/2011; 13(3):641-8.

  Assessment of worker's exposure is becoming increasingly critical in the pharmaceutical industry as drugs of higher potency are being manufactured. The batch nature of operations often makes it difficult to obtain sufficient numbers of exposure measurements and occupational exposure models may b... [more] Assessment of worker's exposure is becoming increasingly critical in the pharmaceutical industry as drugs of higher potency are being manufactured. The batch nature of operations often makes it difficult to obtain sufficient numbers of exposure measurements and occupational exposure models may be useful tools in the exposure assessment process. This paper aims to describe further refinement and validation of an existing deterministic occupational exposure model to predict airborne exposure of workers in this industry. Workplace exposure assessment data (n = 381) containing all the contextual information required for the exposure model were collated from a multinational pharmaceutical company. The measured exposure levels ranged from 5 × 10⁻⁷ to 200 mg m⁻³ for largely task based samples, and included a range of handling activities, local control measures and abnormal operating conditions. Model input parameters for local control measures and handling activities were refined to reflect pharmaceutical situations. The refined exposure model resulted in good correlations between the log-transformed model predictions and the actual measured data for the overall dataset (r(s) = 0.61, n = 381, p < 0.001) and at scenario level (r(s) = 0.69, n = 48, p < 0.001). The model overestimated scenarios with measured exposure levels < 0.1 mg m⁻³ (r(s) = 0.69, bias = 0.71, n = 46, p < 0.001), and underestimated scenarios with higher measured concentrations ( > 0.1 mg m⁻³) (r(s) = 0.59, bias = -4.9, n = 33, p < 0.001). Including information on the refined sub-parameters improved the correlations, suggesting the uncertainty in the model parameters was partly responsible for the bias. Further scientific data from the pharmaceutical industry on model input parameters, particularly on the efficacy of local control measures, may help improve the accuracy of the model predictions. The refined exposure model appears to be a useful exposure assessment screening tool for the pharmaceutical industry.
• 2.76

  Impact points

  Time trends (1998-2007) in brain cancer incidence rates in relation to mobile phone use in England.

  Frank de Vocht, Igor Burstyn, John W Cherrie

  Bioelectromagnetics. 01/2011; 32(5):334-9.

  Mobile phone use in the United Kingdom and other countries has risen steeply since the early 1990's when the first digital mobile phones were introduced. There is an ongoing controversy about whether radio frequency (RF) exposure from mobile phones increases the risk of brain cancer. However, gi... [more] Mobile phone use in the United Kingdom and other countries has risen steeply since the early 1990's when the first digital mobile phones were introduced. There is an ongoing controversy about whether radio frequency (RF) exposure from mobile phones increases the risk of brain cancer. However, given the widespread use and nearly two decades elapsing since mobile phones were introduced, an association should have produced a noticeable increase in the incidence of brain cancer by now. Trends in rates of newly diagnosed brain cancer cases in England between 1998 and 2007 were examined. There were no time trends in overall incidence of brain cancers for either gender, or any specific age group. Systematic increases in rates for cancers of the temporal lobe in men (0.04 new cases/year) and women (0.02/year) were observed, along with decreases in the rates of cancers of the parietal lobe (-0.03/year), cerebrum (-0.02/year) and cerebellum (-0.01/year) in men only. The increased use of mobile phones between 1985 and 2003 has not led to a noticeable change in the incidence of brain cancer in England between 1998 and 2007. The observed increase in the rate of cancers in the temporal lobe, if caused by mobile phone use, would constitute <1 additional case per 100,000 people in that period. These data do not indicate a pressing need to implement a precautionary principle by means of population-wide interventions to reduce RF exposure from mobile phones.
• 2.23

  Impact points

  Exposure to rubber process dust and fume since 1970s in the United Kingdom; influence of origin of measurement data.

  Michela Agostini, Frank de Vocht, Martie van Tongeren, John W Cherrie, Karen S Galea, Hans Kromhout

  Journal of environmental monitoring : JEM. 05/2010; 12(5):1170-8.

  The objective of this study was to compare measured concentrations of rubber process dust and rubber fume originating from different sources in the British rubber manufacturing industry. Almost 8000 exposure measurements were obtained from industry-based survey results collected by the British Rubbe... [more] The objective of this study was to compare measured concentrations of rubber process dust and rubber fume originating from different sources in the British rubber manufacturing industry. Almost 8000 exposure measurements were obtained from industry-based survey results collected by the British Rubber Manufacturers' Association (BRMA), and covering the years 1977 to 2002, and from a series of small surveys contained in the Health and Safety Executive's (HSE) National Exposure Database (HSE-NEDB) from 1980 to 2002. The analysis investigated temporal trends in the exposure concentrations and the underlying main factors responsible for these changes. Analyses were carried out using hierarchical linear mixed effects models. Average personal exposures to rubber process dust and rubber fumes were respectively a factor 2 and 4 higher for the HSE-NEDB data when compared to data originating from the industry (BRMA data). Personal exposure to rubber process dust decreased on average by 4.1% (95% CI 4.7-3.6) annually for the BRMA data and slightly less at 2.3% (95% CI 5.2-0.7%) per annum for the HSE-NEDB data. Personal exposure to rubber fume also showed a downward temporal trend of 2.9% (95% CI 3.6-2.3%) and 4.8% (95% CI 7.4-2.1%) annually for the BRMA and HSE-NEDB data, respectively. These trends differed considerably between departments. No major changes in the estimated temporal trends in exposure concentrations were observed after including the presence of local exhaust ventilation in the models for any department in the BRMA and HSE-NEDB datasets. Lack of information on the quality and status of the local exhaust ventilation is the most likely explanation for this. In conclusion, even though there were relatively similar downward time trends in both rubber process dust and fume concentrations in both datasets, the source of exposure data was an important determinant of average exposure concentrations present in the British rubber manufacturing industry. Lack of detailed auxiliary information on company size, reason for sampling, measurement strategy and other potentially important determinants of exposure prevented an explanation for the observed differences in exposure level.
• 4.35

  Impact points

  Occupation and cancer in Britain.

  L Rushton, S Bagga, R Bevan, T P Brown, J W Cherrie, P Holmes, L Fortunato, R Slack, M Van Tongeren, C Young, S J Hutchings

  British journal of cancer. 04/2010; 102(9):1428-37.

  Prioritising control measures for occupationally related cancers should be evidence based. We estimated the current burden of cancer in Britain attributable to past occupational exposures for International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) group 1 (established) and 2A (probable) carcinogens. We c... [more] Prioritising control measures for occupationally related cancers should be evidence based. We estimated the current burden of cancer in Britain attributable to past occupational exposures for International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) group 1 (established) and 2A (probable) carcinogens. We calculated attributable fractions and numbers for cancer mortality and incidence using risk estimates from the literature and national data sources to estimate proportions exposed. 5.3% (8019) cancer deaths were attributable to occupation in 2005 (men, 8.2% (6362); women, 2.3% (1657)). Attributable incidence estimates are 13 679 (4.0%) cancer registrations (men, 10 063 (5.7%); women, 3616 (2.2%)). Occupational attributable fractions are over 2% for mesothelioma, sinonasal, lung, nasopharynx, breast, non-melanoma skin cancer, bladder, oesophagus, soft tissue sarcoma, larynx and stomach cancers. Asbestos, shift work, mineral oils, solar radiation, silica, diesel engine exhaust, coal tars and pitches, occupation as a painter or welder, dioxins, environmental tobacco smoke, radon, tetrachloroethylene, arsenic and strong inorganic mists each contribute 100 or more registrations. Industries and occupations with high cancer registrations include construction, metal working, personal and household services, mining, land transport, printing/publishing, retail/hotels/restaurants, public administration/defence, farming and several manufacturing sectors. 56% of cancer registrations in men are attributable to work in the construction industry (mainly mesotheliomas, lung, stomach, bladder and non-melanoma skin cancers) and 54% of cancer registrations in women are attributable to shift work (breast cancer). This project is the first to quantify in detail the burden of cancer and mortality due to occupation specifically for Britain. It highlights the impact of occupational exposures, together with the occupational circumstances and industrial areas where exposures to carcinogenic agents occurred in the past, on population cancer morbidity and mortality; this can be compared with the impact of other causes of cancer. Risk reduction strategies should focus on those workplaces where such exposures are still occurring.