Appendix D Food Codes for NHANES - OEHHA

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Scientific Review Panel Draft February, 2012 tends to bind hydrocarbons more tightly than conventional soil organic matter and reduces bioavailability for dermal absorption. In addition, a soil loading of 9 mg/cm 2 exceeds monolayer coverage with soil sieved to
Scientific Review Panel Draft February, 2012 tetrachloroethylene was applied neat to the skin and covered with an occlusive patch after the vehicle had evaporated (Koizumi, 1991). The cumulative mean absorbed body burden, not including dosed skin directly contaminated, was 2.67% after 24 hours. Approximately 5% of the total dose remained in or on the dosed area of skin prior to washing. Washing the dosed area of skin resulted in removal of 4% of the total dose, indicating that 1% of the total dose was absorbed in the skin on which 14 C-HCB was directly applied. A Monte Carlo simulation was developed to produce a probability density function for the dermal uptake fraction of HCB in soil deposited on human skin (McKone, 1991). A two-layer model was used that accounted for chemical properties, skin properties, soil properties, and exposure conditions. The resulting modeled daily dermal uptake fraction had an arithmetic mean value of 0.15 per day (24 hrs), and an arithmetic standard deviation of 0.18 per day. F.4.4.2 Discussion and Recommendation for a Hexachlorobenzene Compound ABS A single dermal absorption study in rats observed a 24-hr fractional absorption of 4% (rounded to nearest whole number) for the neat compound. This estimate includes HCB retained in skin at the site of application. Absorption of HCB may have increased as a result of occlusion of the exposed skin area to prevent evaporation of HCB. A default ABS of 4% is recommended based on the rat dermal exposure study, although the chemical was applied neat to the skin. The HCB modeling study by suggests that the fractional absorption of HCB in soil may be 15%, so no adjustment was made to the ABS to account for reduced absorption due to partitioning to soil organic matter (McKone, 1991). In support, HCB is structurally similar to hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), which has an ABS of 3%. However, the Kow for HCB (log Kow 5.73) is about 100 times greater than that of the HCHs, which would suggest a greater ability for absorption into skin. On the other hand, the high Kow also indicates that HCB will have stronger sorption to soil organic material compared to the HCHs, which usually decreases the dermal absorption potential. Until more relevant dermal absorption studies are conducted, an ABS of 4% is recommended for HCB. F. 4.5 Hexachlorocyclohexanes Hexachlorocyclohexanes (HCHs) occur as eight isomers. The most common isomer is the gamma, which when purified to 99%, was sold under the trade name of lindane. Lindane was a widely used pesticide but almost all uses of lindane have been banned in the United States due to carcinogenicity concerns, high biopersistence and bioaccumulation. Dermal absorption data exist only for lindane, thus all HCH isomers are considered to have the same dermal absorption characteristics as lindane. F-59
Page 1 and 2:
SRP Review Draft Version 2 June, 20
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
SRPcientific Review Panel Draft Ver
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Scientific Review Panel Draft Febru
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92: Scientific Review Panel Draft Febru
Page 141: Scientific Review Panel Draft Febru
Page 163 and 164: SRP Review Draft Version 2 June, 20
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Scientific Review PanelSRP Draft Ve
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
Page 295 and 296:
Page 297 and 298:
Page 299 and 300:
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
Page 305 and 306:
Page 307 and 308:
Page 309 and 310:
Page 311 and 312:
Page 313 and 314:
Page 315 and 316:
Page 317 and 318:
Page 319 and 320:
Page 321 and 322:
Page 323 and 324:
Page 325 and 326:
Page 327 and 328:
Page 329 and 330:
Page 331 and 332:
Page 333 and 334:
Page 335 and 336:
Page 337 and 338:
show all

Appendix D Food Codes for NHANES - OEHHA

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?