25.12.2012 Views

revised final - Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry ...

revised final - Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry ...

revised final - Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

MERCURY 451<br />

5. POTENTIAL FOR HUMAN EXPOSURE<br />

to chronic exposure to mercury, but the relative contribution of recent exposures to mercury levels in these<br />

media, in comparison to releases of mercury stored in tissues as a result of earlier exposures, is not well<br />

understood (EPA 1984b) (see Section 2.5).<br />

Mercury exposure also may result from the transport of mercury to a workers' home on contaminated<br />

clothing <strong>and</strong> shoes (ATSDR 1990; Hudson et al. 1987; Zirschky 1990). Increased exposure to mercury has<br />

been reported in children of workers who are occupationally exposed (Hudson et al. 1987). The population<br />

of children at highest risk are those whose parents work in facilities that use mercury, but where no<br />

protective uni<strong>for</strong>ms or footgear are used. The mercury is thought to be transferred to the workers' homes in<br />

their clothing <strong>and</strong> shoes. While prevention of employee-transported contamination to their homes is<br />

preferred, cleaning the homes of workers occupationally exposed to mercury is also effective in reducing<br />

exposure <strong>for</strong> family members (Zirschky 1990). In an exposure study of families of workers at a chloralkali<br />

plant in Charleston, Tennessee, mercury levels in the air of the workers' homes averaged 0.92 µg/m 3<br />

(ATSDR 1990).<br />

The use of fluorescent tube compactors by industrial facilities may also expose those operating the<br />

compactors <strong>and</strong> workers in adjacent areas to increased levels of mercury vapor if proper filters, scrubbing<br />

devices, <strong>and</strong> ventilation are not used (Kirschner et al. 1988).<br />

Dentists <strong>and</strong> other dental professionals may have greater exposure to mercury as a result of preparing <strong>and</strong><br />

applying dental amalgams (Ayyadurai <strong>and</strong> Krishnashamy 1988; Skare et al. 1990). Nyl<strong>and</strong>er et al. (1989)<br />

sampled pituitary gl<strong>and</strong> tissue from autopsies of 8 dental staff <strong>and</strong> 27 control individuals in Sweden. These<br />

authors reported median mercury concentrations of 815 µg/kg (ppb) wet weight (range, 135–4,040 µg/kg) in<br />

pituitary tissue of dental staff (7 dentists <strong>and</strong> 1 dental assistant), as compared to a median of 23 µg/kg (wet<br />

weight) in 27 individuals from the general population. None of the dental staff had been working<br />

immediately prior to their deaths, <strong>and</strong> in several cases, more than a decade had passed since the cessation of<br />

their clinical work. The number of amalgams did not correlate to pituitary gl<strong>and</strong> concentrations in the<br />

controls. However, if two of the controls with the highest mercury concentrations were excluded (there was<br />

some evidence that these individuals had received occupational exposures), then the correlation was<br />

significant (p

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!