09.02.2014 Views

home edit2 whole TSD November 2002 PDF format - OEHHA

home edit2 whole TSD November 2002 PDF format - OEHHA

home edit2 whole TSD November 2002 PDF format - OEHHA

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

The power of this study can be criticized, with exposures as rare as they were. Also, the inclusion of<br />

cancer cases from the early 1960s can be questioned. These cases would not have had sufficient<br />

latency to have been caused by an exposure in Vietnam.<br />

In 1983, an Australian Royal Commission began investigating the effects of Agent Orange exposure to<br />

Australian Vietnam veterans. However, their report, released in 1985, does not supply much<br />

in<strong>format</strong>ion on the effects of PCDDs. The executive summary concluded that "only a very limited<br />

number of Australian servicemen were ever directly exposed," and further, that the dose received by the<br />

majority of Australian veterans was "so minute that it may, without doubt, be ignored," (e.g., it noted<br />

that no Australians developed chloracne). Not surprisingly, the Commission found no evidence of any<br />

cancer excess among the "exposed" servicemen (Royal Commission, 1985).<br />

Abate et al. (1982) summarized the series of studies following the 1976 accidental release of TCDD<br />

from a TCP-producing plant in Seveso, Italy. The investigators looked at mortality rates for 11<br />

municipalities for four years after the accident and reported no increase in cancer mortality. These<br />

studies served mainly to provide baseline rates for future studies, because clearly not enough time had<br />

elapsed to provide the minimum 10 to 20 years required for an increased cancer risk to become<br />

manifest (Bruzzi, 1983).<br />

Animal Studies<br />

Van Miller et al. (1977 a,b) reported the results of a study in which rats were fed diets containing from<br />

1 ppt to 1 ppm of 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) for 78 weeks. Surviving rats were<br />

killed after 95 weeks. Laparotomies were performed on all surviving rats at 65 weeks and all tumors<br />

were biopsied. Rats in the three highest dose groups, receiving 50 ppb or more, died early. A variety<br />

of tumors were found in rats receiving 5 ppt to 5 ppb while no-neoplasms were found in the control or<br />

low-dose groups. The absence of tumors in these two groups is unusual in this strain of rats. In<br />

addition, because of the small number of animals in each group (10) the study was inadequate to<br />

determine the carcinogenic potential of TCDD.<br />

Toth et al. (1979) administered TCDD to male Swiss/H/Riop strain mice by gavage once a week for a<br />

year, then followed them for their lifetime. The weekly doses were 0.007, 0.7, and 7.0 µg/kg. Analysis<br />

of the results from this study focused on the incidence of liver tumors. A significant increase in the<br />

incidence of liver tumors was observed in the intermediate-dose group compared to the four separate<br />

control groups. The high-dose group, however, had an incidence of liver tumors that was similar to the<br />

control group. This finding may be explained by the early mortality in the high-dose group. The average<br />

life span was 424 days for this group, compared to average life spans of between 577 and 651 days for<br />

the control groups. If the treated animals had lived it is possible that more tumors may have formed.<br />

Kociba et al. (1978) conducted a two-year feeding study in male and female Sprague-Dawley rats<br />

given diets containing 2200, 210, or 22 parts per trillion (w/w) TCDD for two years. Consumption of<br />

these diets resulted in daily doses of 0.1, 0.01, and 0.001 µg/kg body weight, respectively. There were<br />

50 male and 50 female rats in each treatment group and 86 animals of each sex in the control group.<br />

173

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!