• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文会议>Annual conference of the International Society of Exposure Science >Health Risks of Flame Retardants in California House Dust
【24h】

Health Risks of Flame Retardants in California House Dust

机译：加州房屋灰尘中阻燃剂的健康风险

获取原文
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Background: Higher house dust levels of polybrominated diphenyl ether (PBDE) flame retardants (FRs) have been reported in California (CA) than in other US states. Whereas PBDE exposures have been well-studied, little is known about exposures to and potential risks from other FRs. In a recent study in CA homes, we found 44 FRs, representing the broadest investigation of FRs in house dust to date. Our work suggests that manufacturers continue to use chemicals with health concerns and introduce chemicals with uncharacterized toxicity. Aims: To provide perspective on potential health risks associated with exposures to FRs in CA homes, we compare dust concentrations to available risk-based screening levels. We also explore gaps in health information and highlight areas for further research. Methods: We analyzed 2011 CA house dust samples for 49 FRs: PBDEs, Firemaster~® 550, other brominated FRs, and halogenated and non-halogenated organophosphate FRs (OPFRs). We compared FR levels with EPA residential soil screening levels or screening levels derived using available cancer slope factors. Results: We detected 43 FRs. Risk-based screening levels are available for pentaBDEs, octaBDEs, hexabromobenzene, 2 chlorinated OPFRS, and 2 non-halogenated OPFRs. We derived screening levels for tris(1,3-dichloro-isopropyl)phosphate (TDCIPP) and tris(2,3-dibromopropyljphosphate. Half of the homes had levels that exceeded at least one screening level. Levels of tris(2-chloroethyl)phosphate (TCEP) and TDCIPP, CA Proposition 65 carcinogens, and BDE 47 and BDE 99 exceeded screening levels. TCIPP levels were below a non-carcinogenic screening level; however, long-term carcinogenicity studies have not been conducted despite structural similarity to TDCIPP and TCEP. Screening levels were not available for other FRs, often because of a lack of toxicity studies. Conclusions: The continued use of FRs with established health concerns and those with limited data highlights the need to modernize US chemical policies to require more thorough testing and disclosure of chemicals prior to sale.
机译：背景：据报道，加利福尼亚州（CA）的房屋内多溴二苯醚（PBDE）阻燃剂（FRs）灰尘含量高于美国其他州。尽管对PBDE的暴露进行了充分的研究，但对其他FR的暴露和潜在风险知之甚少。在CA房屋中的一项最新研究中，我们发现了44个阻燃剂，代表了迄今为止对房屋灰尘中阻燃剂的最广泛调查。我们的工作建议制造商继续使用具有健康隐患的化学药品，并引入具有非典型毒性的化学药品。目的：为了提供与CA房屋中的FR暴露相关的潜在健康风险的观点，我们将粉尘浓度与可用的基于风险的筛查水平进行了比较。我们还探讨了健康信息方面的差距，并强调了需要进一步研究的领域。方法：我们分析了2011年CA房屋粉尘样本中的49种阻燃剂：PBDE，Firemaster®550，其他溴化阻燃剂以及卤代和非卤代有机磷酸酯FR（OPFR）。我们将FR水平与EPA住宅土壤筛选水平或使用可用的癌症斜率因子得出的筛选水平进行了比较。结果：我们检测到43个FR。对于五溴二苯醚，八溴二苯醚，六溴苯，2种氯化OPFRS和2种非卤代OPFR，可以采用基于风险的筛查水平。我们得出了磷酸三（1,3-二氯异丙基）酯（TDCIPP）和磷酸三（2,3-二溴丙基丙基）的筛查水平。一半的房屋的水平至少超过一个筛查水平。磷酸盐（TCEP）和TDCIPP，CA Proposition 65致癌物以及BDE 47和BDE 99超过了筛查水平; TCIPP水平低于非致癌性筛查水平;但是，尽管与TDCIPP和TCEP。通常由于缺乏毒性研究而无法对其他阻燃剂进行筛查。出售前要披露化学品。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号