Exposure margin

Chemical Toxicity. Radiopharmaceuticals are subject to the same requirements for safety as are other pharmaceuticals, and are tested for chemical toxicity in much the same manner. It is generally understood, however, that patients are likely to receive relatively few doses of any given radiopharmaceutical so that the effects of long-term chronic exposure to the compound rarely need be assessed. Safety margins, that is, the ratio of the adininistered dose to the lowest dose that produces an observable effect, are usually on the order of 100 or more. 

Effects of given concentrations of nitrogen oxides are listed in Table 5.33 the margin between concentrations that provoke mild symptoms and those proving to be fatal is small. A person with a normal respiratory function may be affected by exposure to as low as 5 ppm diseases such as bronchitis may be aggravated by such exposures. The current 8 hr TWA OES is 3 ppm with an STEL (page 99) of 5 ppm. 

In risk characterization, step four, the human exposure situation is compared to the toxicity data from animal studies, and often a safety -margin approach is utilized. The safety margin is based on a knowledge of uncertainties and individual variation in sensitivity of animals and humans to the effects of chemical compounds. Usually one assumes that humans are more sensitive than experimental animals to the effects of chemicals. For this reason, a safety margin is often used. This margin contains two factors, differences in biotransformation within a species (human), usually 10, and differences in the sensitivity between species (e.g., rat vs. human), usually also 10. The safety factor which takes into consideration interindividual differences within the human population predominately indicates differences in biotransformation, but sensitivity to effects of chemicals is also taken into consideration (e.g., safety faaor of 4 for biotransformation and 2.5 for sensitivity 4 x 2.5 = 10). For example, if the lowest dose that does not cause any toxicity to rodents, rats, or mice, i.e., the no-ob-servable-adverse-effect level (NOAEL) is 100 mg/kg, this dose is divided by the safety factor of 100. The safe dose level for humans would be then 1 mg/kg. Occasionally, a NOAEL is not found, and one has to use the lowest-observable-adverse-effect level (LOAEL) in safety assessment. In this situation, often an additional un-... 

Marginal irritant A material that is capable of causing an irritation response after repeated exposures. 

The sheer complexity of environmental mixtnres of EDCs, possible interactive effects, and capacity of some EDCs to bioaccumulate (e.g., in fish, steroidal estrogens and alkylphenolic chemicals have been shown to be concentrated up to 40,000-fold in the bile [Larsson et al. 1999 Gibson et al. 2005]) raises questions about the adequacy of the risk assessment process and safety margins established for EDCs. There is little question that considerable further work is needed to generate a realistic pictnre of the mixture effects and exposure threats of EDCs to wildlife populations than has been derived from studies on individual EDCs. Further discussion of the toxicity of mixtures will be found in Chapter 2, Section 2.6. 

Opiate drug exposure has a significant impact on HIV infection as well as progression to HIV-associated dementia. On a cellular level it is comprehendible that drugs of abuse such as opioids would reduce the threshold for neurotoxicity such that a marginally toxic insult would now be exacerbated and lead to cell death or injury... 

NOAEL (no-observed-adverse-effect level) is defined as the highest dose at which no adverse effects are observed in the most susceptible animal species. The NOAEL is used as a basis for setting human safety standards for acceptable daily intakes (ADIs), taking into account uncertainty factors for extrapolation from animals to humans and inter-individual variabilities of humans. The adequacy of any margin of safety or margin of exposure must consider the nature and quality of the available hazard identification and dose-response data and the reliability and relevance of the exposure estimations. In some cases, no adverse endpoint can be identified such as for many naturally occurring compounds that are widespread in foods. In that case, an ADI Not Specified is assigned. ... 

This Study has shown that reasonably uniform platinum crystallites can be made on y-alumlna, and that platinum and palladium can be segregated and maintained In that form for the most part even after exposure to high temperature oxidation-reduction conditions. Highly dispersed clusters of palladium, nickel, cobalt, and Iron can be observed. Cluster size determination could not be accurately made because of the lack of contrast between the cluster and the support. The marginal detectability by EDS for these clusters enabled elemental Identification to be made, however, mass uniformity determinations could not be made. 

The vein-type deposits can be divided into two based on the metals produced precious (Au, Ag) and base metal (Pb, Zn, Ag, Mn, Cu, Fe) vein-types. There are two sub-types of the base metal vein-type deposits, the Cu-Pb-Zn sub-type and the Pb- Zn-Mn-Ag sub-type. Cu-Pb-Zn veins occur in southern part of the province. Large Pb-Zn-Mn-Ag veins and Au-Ag veins are distributed in northeastern part. In the northeastern part, Au-Ag vein-type deposits occur in marginal zones of the province, while the base metal-rich deposits (Pb-Zn-Mn veins and Kuroko deposits) in central zone (Fig. 1.149). The marginal zone is characterized by exposure of Quaternary volcanic rocks and Plio-Pleistocene volcanic rocks in which Au-Ag veins occur, whereas the central zone is by thick submarine volcanic rocks (Fig. 1.150), in which base metal-rich deposits (base metal veins and Kuroko deposits) occur (Fig. 1.150). Tertiary volcanic rocks, Quaternary volcanic rocks and faults are distributed, trending generally from NW to SE. Some Cu-Pb-Zn veins in southern part are hosted by basement rocks. On the other hand, Pb-Zn-Mn-Ag and Au-Ag veins occur in Tertiary and Quaternary volcanic rocks. 

To calculate the safe re-entry interval (REI), the margin of exposure (MOE) must be considered. Worker risk is measured as a margin of exposure and is related to how closely the occupational exposure comes to the no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL, for oxamyl 50 mg kg day ). MOE is defined as... 

Using the nonlinear model substituting 0.915 p.gcm (the DFR value from the model 1 day after application) into Equation (6) yields a dose of 1.05 mgkg day" and an MOL from Equation (5) of 47, below the required value of 100 for margin of exposure. Performing the same calculation on the day 2 data gives a dose of 0.344 mg kg day and an MOE of 145, which is above the level of 100 required to establish a safe re-entry level. Therefore, a 2-day period is adequate to ensure worker safety. The observed values of 0.936 and 0.234 qg cm for days 1 and 2 match closely the values predicted by the model. 

The FTIR data recorded upon N0/02 adsorption in the presence of C02 showed that bidentate carbonates were immediately formed along with nitrite species. By increasing the time of contact, carbonates were partially displaced, while nitrites evolved to nitrate species [52], Notably, the amounts of surface nitrites present at each contact time are lower in the presence of C02 than in its absence. This indicates that C02 competes for the surface oxygen sites able to give nitrites at the beginning of the adsorption process in fact, after several minutes of exposure to the N0/02/C02 mixture, the amount of nitrates stored was comparable to that obtained in the absence of C02. In conclusion, while in the presence of C02 the nitrite route is inhibited to some extent due to the competition between NO and C02 for the surface oxygen sites of the Ba phase, the nitrate route is only marginally affected by the C02 presence, if any. 

Assessments of risks associated with the use of chlorpyrifos insecticide products for workers have been made. The assessments are based on the results of field studies conducted in citrus groves, a Christmas tree farm, cauliflower and tomato fields, and greenhouses that utilized both passive dosimetry and biomonitoring techniques to determine exposure. The biomonitoring results likely provide the best estimate of absorbed dose of chlorpyrifos, and these have been compared to the acute and chronic no observed effect levels (NOELs) for chlorpyrifos. Standard margin-of-exposure (MOE) calculations using the geometric mean of the data are performed however, probability (Student s f-test) and distributional (Monte Carlo simulation) analyses are deemed to provide more realistic evaluations of exposure and risk to the exposed population. 

Three approaches to risk analysis will be presented here for the available chlorpyrifos exposure data, namely (1) the single point, margin of safety approach (2) probability analysis and (3) Monte Carlo simulation. 

---