Gloves exposure studies

No studies were located regarding absorption of endrin in humans after dermal exposure. Agricultural worker exposure studies demonstrated that dermal exposure (18.7 mg/hour without gloves) was significantly greater than respiratory exposure (0.41 mg/hour) and that workers exposed to endrin received about 0.2-1.5% of atoxic dose per hour of exposure. No adverse effects were reported in the worker cohort (Wolfe et al. 1963). 

Respiratory Effects. No studies were located regarding respiratory effects in humans after inhalation exposure to 1,3,5-TNB. One retrospective study (Okubo and Shigeta 1982) of acute occupational exposure to 1,3-DNB dust particles was located. Six workers were removing crystallized 1,3-DNB from a tank and were protected with gauze masks and rubber gloves. Exposure occurred over a period of 6 days. By the end of the exposure period, some of the workers complained of slight dyspnea upon exertion. Inhalation was considered to be a primary route of exposure because a relatively small skin area (face and neck) was exposed. Limitations of this study include lack of information on the concentration of 1,3-DNB in the air, the amount of particulate 1,3-DNB deposited on workers skin, and the exact duration of exposure. 

Dermal/Ocular Effects. There is very little information on dermal/ocular effects after oral exposure to MBOCA. In one occupational exposure study, a worker was accidentally sprayed with molten MBOCA, and some of the compound entered his mouth. The worker complained of burning face and eyes shortly after exposure (Hosein and Van Roosmalen 1978). At the time of the accident the worker was wearing gloves and safety glasses, but he had no respirator or face shield. It is therefore likely that exposure also occurred by inhalation and dermal absorption. This study is limited because only one exposed individual was described, and no further information was given regarding the worker s condition, the dose of MBOCA, or the precise exposure route. 

Rut ser gloves worn applicators qpparently mlnlinized hemd exposure DDVP application euid handling resulted in 0.024 pg/cs /hr. Hand contamination accounted for 0.9% of tot d. dermal exposure (Table 1) as oompared with 87% in carbaryl exposure studies (11, 13) where hand protection was not worn. The fact that DDVP was recovered from the hands of the lioators in all 20 treatments denonstrated the need to stress hand protection and decontamination even when ruliher gloves are worn. 

The exposure value thus yielded provides a measure of the skin exposure with and without consideration of a protective garment and gloves (personal protective equipment = PPE), and may be taken directly for comparison with appropriate data from relevant toxicity studies for assessment of the risk via the dermal route. 

Roberts JW, Camann DE. 1989. Pilot study of a cotton glove press test for assessing exposure to pesticides in house dust. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 43 717-724. 

Another approach is to perform ex situ reactions and insert the sample into a high vacuum system without exposure to ambient conditions. Incorporating N2 glove boxes or reactor systems with X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) sample handling can also provide information that is closer to operational conditions. In a similar manner ex situ reactions and sample handling are starting to be apphed to electron microscopy studies. Commercially available sample transfer systems will accelerate the application of this methodology. 

DNB readily permeated the latex gloves used for protection has enormous implications in the occupational setting because it shows that this kind of protection is ineffective. Limitations of this study include small sample size, concomitant exposure to other chemicals, and lack of complete information on exposure dose. 

An individual s absorbed dose is assumed to be proportional to the amount of a.i. applied. In this paper that proportion (mg a.i. absorbed/lb a.i. applied) is derived from the exposure information in USEPA s Pesticide Handlers Database (PHED, 1992) and herbicide-specific absorption data. PHED provides exposure information on 12 parts of the body (as opposed to the body as a whole). For each body part, PHED provides data on the amount of active ingredient that comes into contact with that body part per pound of active ingredient applied (amount inhaled or amount of dermal contact per pound applied). The PHED data used here assume that the individual is wearing normal clothing and gloves but not additional protective devices such as aprons or respirators. Based on atrazine- and simazine-specific studies conducted by Syngenta, the fraction of atrazine and simazine absorbed as a result of dermal contact is 0.056 when the exposure is less than or equal to 8. ig/cm2, 0.012 for exposures greater than or equal to 80 i,g/cm2, and a linear interpolated value for intermediate exposures. The fraction of the inhaled atrazine or simazine that is assumed to be absorbed is 1.0. 

The dermal exposure patches were made of 9-ply gauze (2,4,5-T study) or denim (2,4-D study) and were attached with safety pins to workers clothing by research team members wearing clean gloves. Following the spray activities, the patches were placed in individual specimen bottles and transported to the laboratory for analysis. In the 2,4,5-T study, all six patches from each individual were pooled before analyses were made in the 2,4-D studies the patches were kept separate and analyzed individually. Using a photograph of the worker in his spray attire and the amounts of pesticide found on the patches, we estimated total dermal exposure for each worker (Durham and Wolfe, 1962). 

---