• 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：加州尘埃尘埃阻燃剂的健康风险

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：在加州（CA）中报告了高杂织物二苯基醚（PBDE）阻燃剂（FRS）的较高的房屋粉尘水平而不是在其他美国国家。虽然PBDE曝光已经很好地研究，但对其他FRS的暴露和潜在风险知之甚少。在最近在CA Homes的一项研究中，我们发现44 FRS，代表迄今为止尘埃灰尘的最广泛调查。我们的工作表明，制造商继续使用具有健康问题的化学品，并引入化学品，具有无表毒性。旨在提供关于与CA Homes中FRS曝光相关的潜在健康风险的视角，我们将粉尘浓度与可用风险的筛查水平进行比较。我们还探讨了健康信息和突出区域进一步研究的差距。方法：我们分析了2011年CA House粉尘样品49 FRS：PBDES，Firemaster〜？ 550，其他溴化FRS，卤化和非卤化有机磷酸酯FRS（OPFRS）。我们将FR水平与EPA住宅土壤筛查水平进行比较或使用可用癌症斜率因子筛选水平。结果：我们检测到43 FRS。基于风险的筛查水平适用于五角草，八面叶，六溴苯，2个氯化OPFR和2个非卤化OPFRS。我们衍生出Tris（1,3-二氯 - 异丙基）磷酸盐（TDCIPP）和TRIS（2,3-二溴丙基磷酸酯的筛选水平。其中一半的家庭的水平超过了至少一种筛选水平。TRIS（2-氯乙基）的水平磷酸盐（TCEP）和TDCIPP，Ca Prossion 65致癌物质和BDE 47和BDE 99超过筛查水平。TCIPP水平低于非致癌筛查水平;然而，尽管与TDCIPP结构相似，但尚未进行长期致癌性研究TCEP。筛选水平对于其他FR，通常是由于缺乏毒性研究。结论：持续使用具有既定健康问题的FRS和数据有限的人突出了使美国化学政策的必要性更新，需要更彻底的测试披露销售前的化学品。

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