Advertisement

Pesticide Exposure Assessment: Past, Present and Future

  • John P. Worgan
  • Sylvester Rozario
Part of the NATO · Challenges of Modern Society book series (NATS, volume 19)

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to provide a brief overview of the past and present accomplishments and possible future directions of the field of pesticide exposure assessment. Furthermore, this paper is meant to provide the background and set the stage for discussion of the four main workshop goals, namely to:

Keywords

Exposure Assessment Biological Monitoring Pesticide Exposure Dermal Exposure Phenoxy Herbicide 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Statistics Canada, “Census Overview of Canadian Agriculture: 1971–1991”, catalogue 93–348, May (1992).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Anon, A look at world markets, Farm Chemicals, pp. 26, 29, 30, 32, 34, September (1985).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    W.F. Durham and H.T. Wolfe, Measurement of the exposure of workers to pesticides, Bull. WHO 26: 75–91 (1962).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    W.J. Popendorf and J.T. Leffingwell, Regulating OP pesticides for farmworker protection, Residue Rev. 82: 125–201 (1982).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    H.N. Nigg and J.H. Stamper, Dislodgeable residues of chlorobenzilate in Florida citrus: worker reentry implications, Chemosphere 13: 1143–1156 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    W.F. Serat, Calculation of a safe reentry time into an orchard treated with a pesticide chemical which produces a measurable physiological response, Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 1: 170181 (1973).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    W.F. Serat, D.C. Mengle, H.P. Anderson, E. Kahn and J.B. Bailey, On the estimation of worker entry intervals into pesticide treated fields with and without the exposure of human subjects, Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 13: 506–512 (1975).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    R. Krieger, C. Blewett, S. Edmiston, D. Fong, D. Gibbons, L. Meinders, J.R. O’Connell, F. Schneider, J. Spencer and T. Thongsinthusak, Gauging pesticide exposure of handlers (mixers/loaders/applicators) and harvesters in California agriculture, Med. Lay. 81: 474–479 (1991).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    NACA, National Agricultural Chemicals Association, “Guidelines for Conducting Biological Monitoring - Applicator Exposure Studies”, NACA, Washington, DC (1985).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    World Health Organisation, Survey of exposure to organophosphorus pesticides in agriculture, Standard protocol, VBC/75. 9, WHO, Geneva (1975).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    World Health Organization, Field surveys of exposure to pesticides, Standard Protocol, VBC/82. 1, WHO, Geneva (1982).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Pesticide Assessment Guidelines, Subdivision U, Applicator Exposure Monitoring”, U.S. EPA, Washington, DC (1986).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    P. Curry and S. Iyengar, Comparison of exposure assessment guidelines for pesticides, Rev. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 129: 79–93 (1992).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    A.D. Schwope, Permeation resistance of glove materials to agricultural pesticides, Am. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J. 53 (6): 352–361 (1992).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    R.P. Zendzian, Skin penetration method suggested for Environmental Protection Agency Requirements, J. Am. Coll. Toxicol. 8 (5): 829–835 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Health and Welfare Canada, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Agricultural Chemicals Association, Pesticide Handlers Exposure Database (PHED ) (1992).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    C. Lunchick, P. Hamey and S. Iyengar, The use of the North American (PHED) and United Kingdom ( POEM) worker exposure models in pesticide registration, Brighton Crop Protection Conference (1994).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    R.A. Fenske, J.T. Leffingwell and R.C. Spear, A video imaging technique for assessing dermal exposure–I Instrument design and testing, Am. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J. 47: 764–770 (1986).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    R.A. Fenske, S.M. Wong, J.T. Leffingwell and R.C. Spear, A video imaging technique for assessing dermal exposure–II Fluorescent tracer testing, Am. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J. 47: 771–775 (1986).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    J.P. Hsu, D.E. Camann, H. Scattenherg, B. Wheeler, K. Villalobos, M. Kyle, S. Quarderer and R.G. Lewis, New dermal exposure sampling technique, in: “Proceedings of EPA/AWMA Conference: Measurement of Toxic and Related Air Pollutants”, Durham, NC (1993).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    J.R. Vaccaro and R.J. Cranston, Evaluation of dislodgeable residues and absorbed doses of chlorpyrifos following indoor broadcast application of chlorpyrifos-based emulsifiable concentrate, Internal Report, Dow Chemical Co., Midland, MI (1990).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    J. Ross, H.R. Fong and T. Thongsinthusak, Measured potential dermal transfer of surface pesticide residue generated from indoor fogger use: using the CDFA roller method, Chemosphere 22: 297 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    US EPA, Workshop on the Development of Post Application Exposure Monitoring and Assessment Guidelines for Pesticides and Consumer Use Products in Residential Environments, US EPA Report, December 14–15 (1992).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pest Management Alternatives Office, “Feasibility Study for a National Pesticide Use Database”, (1994).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    J.S. Gift, R. Grissom and J.M. Straight, Biological Markers: Monitoring populations exposed to hazardous substances, J. Environ. Health 54 (2): 22–26 (1991).Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    U.S. EPA, “Pesticide Assessment Guidelines, Subdivision K – Exposure: Reentry protection”, Adams JD, EPA 540/9–84–001, Washington, DC (1984).Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    G. Whitmyre, J. Driver, M. Ginevan, R. Tardiff and S. Baker, Human exposure assessment I: Understanding the uncertainties, Toxicol. Indust. Health 8 (5): 297–320 (1992).Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    G. Whitmyre, J. Driver, M. Ginevan, R. Tardiff and S. Baker, Human exposure assessment II: Quantifying and reducing the uncertainties, Toxicol. Indust. Health 8 (5): 321–342 (1992).Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Health and Welfare Canada, “Report on the Findings of a Survey to Assess Apple Growers’ Attitudes, Beliefs, Knowledge, and Practices Regarding Pesticide Use”, Internal Report (1992).Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Health and Welfare Canada, “Report on a Survey of Pesticide Application and Safety Practices Among Corn Producers in Ontario and Quebec”, Internal Report (1989).Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    L. Dahlgren, S. Marshak and H. McDuffie, Farm family wellbeing survey, Conference on Agricultural Safety and Rural Health, Regina, Saskatchewan (1992).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • John P. Worgan
    • 1
  • Sylvester Rozario
    • 1
  1. 1.Chemical Evaluation Division Rm 2702, Main Statistics Canada BldgHealth CanadaOttawaCanada

Personalised recommendations