Assessment of ocular and nasal irritation in asthmatics resulting from fragrance exposure.

BACKGROUND: Many asthmatics report worsening of symptoms following exposure to odours and sensory irritants commonly found in household and cosmetic products. Despite this, little evidence exists to confirm the degree to which such subjective reports are correlated with localized, objective changes in the upper or lower airways following a fragranced product exposure. OBJECTIVE: Subjective symptom reports were compared to objective measures in mild asthmatics, moderate asthmatics and non-asthmatics following exposure to one of two fragranced household aerosol mixtures and a clean air control condition to determine if asthmatics reported greater subjective symptoms of nasal congestion or exhibited objective measures of elevated ocular irritation and nasal congestion following exposure than did healthy controls. METHODS: Measures of nasal mucosal swelling, using acoustic rhinometry, and photographic assessments of ocular hyperemia, using macro-photography, were taken before exposure, immediately after an initial 5-min exposure and again following a 30-min exposure to either of two, fragranced aerosol products and a clean air control. Self-reports of nasal patency at each time-point were also obtained. RESULTS: Although moderate asthmatics tended to report more nasal congestion following fragranced product exposure than did non-asthmatics, no exposure-related changes in ocular redness or nasal mucosal swelling were observed among the three groups. Spirometry readings also failed to show evidence of any exposure-related changes in pulmonary function. CONCLUSION: Despite claims that exposure to fragranced products may trigger ocular and respiratory symptoms among asthmatics, we found no evidence that 30 min of exposure to one of two fragranced aerosols elicited objective adverse effects in the ocular or nasal mucosa of mild and moderate asthmatics. While physiological mechanisms of fragrance impact may yet be responsible for some of the adverse reports among asthmatics following fragrance exposure, such reports may also reflect a non-physiological locus of symptom perception triggered by other sensory cues.

Environmental copper: its dynamics and human exposure issues.

This article provides an overview of the environmental patterns and dynamics of copper from the perspective of issues that affect our ability to examine current human exposures. It presents selected summary information on the levels of copper found in various media and exposure pathways from a variety of information sources, and discusses the breadth and the limitations of this information. The analysis presented focuses on the ability to provide quantitative values for both external metrics of exposures (microenvironmental levels) and internal biological markers of exposure. The status of the current information on environmental copper is placed within a conceptual framework that can be used to identify data gaps, assess the utility of current biological markers of exposure, and examine the need for systematic and consistent data-gathering studies to improve our ability to complete exposure assessments. A primary concern is the exposure to copper through potable water supplies; this is considered within a framework that examines copper levels and distribution in food, soil, air and sediments, as well as the levels found in biological media such as urine, blood, and hair. An existing water consumption model for copper and associated exposure factors is briefly discussed. This type of model will eventually be valuable within a total exposure analysis modeling framework that can consider and prioritize exposures from multiple routes and differentiate levels of concern for both excesses and deficiencies in exposure, an important issue, since copper is an essential nutrient. Finally, this review attempts to examine the needs for better information using as a basis the concerns briefly mentioned in the recent NRC report "Copper in Drinking Water" (National Research Council, 2000).

Effect of vehicle use and maintenance patterns of a self-described group of sensitive individuals and nonsensitive individuals to methyl tertiary-butyl ether in gasoline.

The objective of this study was to compare the driving habits and vehicle maintenance patterns of individuals who report symptoms when exposed to methyl tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE) and those who are asymptomatic when exposed to the oxygenate. Participants were healthy volunteers (CON) and self-reported MTBE-sensitive individuals (SRS) who participated in a controlled exposure study of MTBE in gasoline. A questionnaire was developed to gather information about each participant's automobile usage, engine maintenance habits and fueling and driving patterns. Results showed that the individuals who had self-reported heightened sensitivity to the oxygenate drove their vehicles more often and fueled their vehicles more frequently than asymptomatic individuals. In addition, the self-reported symptomatic individuals in this study were shown to be more likely to drive vehicles with some form of body damage and carbureted engines.

Controlled human exposure to methyl tertiary butyl ether in gasoline: symptoms, psychophysiologic and neurobehavioral responses of self-reported sensitive persons.

The 1990 Clean Air Act mandated oxygenation of gasoline in regions where carbon monoxide standards were not met. To achieve this standard, methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) was increased to 15% by volume during winter months in many locations. Subsequent to the increase of MTBE in gasoline, commuters reported increases in symptoms such as headache, nausea, and eye, nose, and throat irritation. The present study compared 12 individuals selected based on self-report of symptoms (self-reported sensitives; SRSs) associated with MTBE to 19 controls without self-reported sensitivities. In a double-blind, repeated measures, controlled exposure, subjects were exposed for 15 min to clean air, gasoline, gasoline with 11% MTBE, and gasoline with 15% MTBE. Symptoms, odor ratings, neurobehavioral performance on a task of driving simulation, and psychophysiologic responses (heart and respiration rate, end-tidal CO(2), finger pulse volume, electromyograph, finger temperature) were measured before, during, and immediately after exposure. Relative to controls, SRSs reported significantly more total symptoms when exposed to gasoline with 15% MTBE than when exposed to gasoline with 11% MTBE or to clean air. However, these differences in symptoms were not accompanied by significant differences in neurobehavioral performance or psychophysiologic responses. No significant differences in symptoms or neurobehavioral or psychophysiologic responses were observed when exposure to gasoline with 11% MTBE was compared to clean air or to gasoline. Thus, the present study, although showing increased total symptoms among SRSs when exposed to gasoline with 15% MTBE, did not support a dose-response relationship for MTBE exposure nor the symptom specificity associated with MTBE in epidemiologic studies.

A controlled short-term exposure study to investigate the odor differences among three different formulations of gasoline.

Control subjects (CON) and self-reported methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE)-sensitive subjects (SRS) were evaluated to distinguish between the following gasoline blends: gasoline versus gasoline + MTBE (15% MTBE v/v); and gasoline versus gasoline + MTBE + reodorant. The study also investigated the ability of a reodorant to conceal the odor of MTBE in a gasoline mixture. In each of two separate sessions, seven men (four CON, three SRS) and seven women (four CON, three SRS) were asked, in a forced-choice format, to sniff 28 randomized bottle pairs to determine if the odors in each pair were the same or different. Chi-square analyses revealed that, with the exception of one male CON, subjects were unable to distinguish between gasoline and gasoline with MTBE or gasoline with MTBE and the reodorant. Thus, a reodorant is of limited value as an additive which alters the ability of an individual to detect MTBE in a blended gasoline. The results suggest that at the level used in the experiment, no mask would be required to blind a participant from the odor of MTBE if that level is used in a controlled human health effects study of the additive.