Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Front Public Health ; 10: 869232, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35372229

ABSTRACT

Young workers, those under the age of 25, are considered a vulnerable working population, primarily due to their increased risk of injury. In this study we investigate if young workers may also be at an increased risk for occupational exposure to carcinogens. Using the 2006 and 2016 Canadian Census of Population and previously obtained CAREX Canada data, this study aimed to identify sectors and occupations that have high proportions of young workers and where potential exists for exposure to known and suspected carcinogens. Key groups where young workers are likely at a higher risk for occupational exposure to carcinogens were identified. Our work shows that young workers in construction, outdoor occupations, and farming are key groups that warrant further investigation. These specific groups are highlighted because of the large number of young workers employed in these sectors/situations, the high number of possible carcinogen exposures, and the potential for higher risk behavior patterns that typically occur in these types of jobs. While there is no data available to develop carcinogen exposure estimates specific to young workers, it is our perspective that young workers are likely at a higher risk for occupational exposure to carcinogens. Our findings identify opportunities to improve the occupational health and safety for this vulnerable population, particularly for young construction workers, farm workers, and outdoor workers.


Subject(s)
Carcinogens , Occupational Exposure , Occupational Health , Canada/epidemiology , Carcinogens/analysis , Humans , Occupational Exposure/adverse effects
2.
Ann Work Expo Health ; 65(4): 367-372, 2021 05 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33336241

ABSTRACT

Due to the way occupational exposure limits (OELs) are set in Canada, workers across the country are not equally and adequately protected from harmful workplace exposures. This disparity is illustrated in the case of exposure to diesel engine exhaust (DEE). Based on the findings of a recent pan-Canadian and international scan of OELs for DEE, we recommend that Canada overcome these current disparities by moving towards harmonized, evidence-based OELs. To achieve this, Canada should adopt a centralized framework for setting OELs that considers the most recent scientific evidence as well as feasibility of implementation in the Canadian context. We assert that harmonizing OELs across Canada would allow for expertise and resources to be consolidated and is a crucial step to ensuring that all workers are consistently protected from harmful workplace exposures.


Subject(s)
Occupational Exposure , Canada , Humans , Workplace
3.
Saf Health Work ; 9(2): 133-139, 2018 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29928525

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Selecting priority occupational carcinogens is important for cancer prevention efforts; however, standardized selection methods are not available. The objective of this paper was to describe the methods used by CAREX Canada in 2015 to establish priorities for preventing occupational cancer, with a focus on exposure estimation and descriptive profiles. METHODS: Four criteria were used in an expert assessment process to guide carcinogen prioritization: (1) the likelihood of presence and/or use in Canadian workplaces; (2) toxicity of the substance (strength of evidence for carcinogenicity and other health effects); (3) feasibility of producing a carcinogen profile and/or an occupational estimate; and (4) special interest from the public/scientific community. Carcinogens were ranked as high, medium or low priority based on specific conditions regarding these criteria, and stakeholder input was incorporated. Priorities were set separately for the creation of new carcinogen profiles and for new occupational exposure estimates. RESULTS: Overall, 246 agents were reviewed for inclusion in the occupational priorities list. For carcinogen profile generation, 103 were prioritized (11 high, 33 medium, and 59 low priority), and 36 carcinogens were deemed priorities for occupational exposure estimation (13 high, 17 medium, and 6 low priority). CONCLUSION: Prioritizing and ranking occupational carcinogens is required for a variety of purposes, including research, resource allocation at different jurisdictional levels, calculations of occupational cancer burden, and planning of CAREX-type projects in different countries. This paper outlines how this process was achieved in Canada; this may provide a model for other countries and jurisdictions as a part of occupational cancer prevention efforts.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...