Advertisement

Indoor Air Quality: The Contribution of Environmental Tobacco Smoke

  • R. Perry
  • J. N. Lester
  • M. Hunter
  • P. W. W. Kirk
  • S.-O. Baek
Part of the International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health Supplement book series (OCCUPATIONAL)

Summary

An extensive 30-week survey of environmental tobacco smoke has been undertaken in Great Britain. The survey consisted of over 2,900 sampling operations according to a scheme which covered a range of situations to which the public are exposed during their travel and leisure as well as at home and work. Sampling took account of population distribution as well as geographical and seasonal effects.

Three components of tobacco smoke — particulate matter as measured by Minirams, carbon monoxide and nicotine — have been determined in smoking and non-smoking situations, whilst the reported presence or absence of smoking within 2h prior to sampling was used to distinguish between non-smoking and smoking environments. The survey was structured around 30 min sampling periods, using unobstrusive, portable sampling equipment capable of detecting each of the three components at less than 5% of their individual (occupational exposure limit (OEL) is the UK recognized workplace safety level).

Overall mean Miniram particulate matter was 0.56 mg m−3, with a smoking location mean of 0.81 mg m−3 and a non-smoking mean of 0.31 mg m−3. These results, as determined by the Miniram light scattering device are, however, known to be an overestimate when compared to methods based on the measurement of particulate mass, such as the Piezobalance. Subsequent studies in a variety of locations have shown the Miniram to over-estimate by at least a factor of 2.5 in the presence of tobacco smoke.

The overall mean carbon monoxide level was 2.4 ppm with a mean of 2.7 ppm in smoking locations and 2.1 ppm in non-smoking locations. With the limitations of the carbon monoxide monitors, this difference is not thought to be significant.

In calculating the mean results for nicotine, a value of 6.8 μg m−3 (i.e. half the limit of detection) was assumed whenever the nicotine level was below the limnit of detection. This has almost certainly led to an over-estimation of nicotine, particularly in nonsmoking situations, where nicotine was rarely detected. Applying this factor the mean overall nicotine concentration was 14 μg m−3 with a mean of 21 μg m−3 in smoking locations and 8 μg m−3 in non-smoking locations. No nicotine concentrations exceed the OEL set at 500 μ m−3 and 95% of all readings were below 10% of the OEL.

Keywords

Tobacco Smoke Environmental Tobacco Smoke Atmos Environ Environmental Tobacco Smoke Exposure Nicotine Concentration 
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.
    Sterling TD, Collett CW, Sterling EM (1987) J Occupational Medicine 29(l):57–62Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Traynor GW (1987) Atmos Environ 21(2): 377–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sterling TD, Koboyashi D (1977) Environ Res 13:1–35PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council (1981) Indoor Pollutants, National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USAGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Girman JR, Hodgson AT, Ward ML (1987) Atmos Environ 21(2):315–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wallace LA, Pellizzari E, Leaderer B, Zelon H, Sheldon L (1987) Atmos Environ 21(2):385–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Berglund B, Lindval T, Sundell J (1984) Indoor Air. Proc 3rd International Conf Indoor Air Quality and Climate 20–23 Aug, Stockholm, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    National Research Council (1986) Environmental tobacco smoke measuring exposures and assessing health effects. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USAGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sisovic A, Fugas M (1987) Environ Monit and Assessment 9(1):93–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yocom JE (1982) J Air Pollut Control Assoc 32(5):500–520Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    US Department of Health & Human Services (1986) The health consequences of involuntary smoking. A Report of the Surgeon General. US Department of Health & Human Services, HHS 396, Maryland, USAGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Guerin MR, Higgins CE, Jenkins RA (1987) Atmos Environ 21(2):291–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Williams DC, Whitaker JR, Jennings WG (1985) Environ Health Perspectives 60:405–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hammond SK, Leaderer BP, Roche AC, Schenker M (1987) Atmos Environ 21(2):457–462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Aviado DM (1984) Eur J Resp Dis (Suppl) 133:65Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Health and Safety Executive (1987) Occupational exposure limits. Guidance Note EH 40/87. HMSO, London, UKGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Office of Population Censuses and Surveys (Social Survey Division) (1985) General Household Survey 1983. HMSO, London, UKGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Marumatsu M, Umemura S, Akata T, Tomita H (1984) Envir Res 35:218–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Weber A, Fischer T (1980) Int Archs Occup Envir Hlth 4:209–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rawbone RG, Burns W, Patrick RA (1987) Toxicol Letts 35:125–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Health and Safety Executive (1985) Occupational exposure limits. Guidance Note EH 40/85. HMSO, London, UKGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Conner JM, Murphy JJ, Heauner DL, Ingebrethsen BJ, Angel AL, Oldaker GB, Green CR (1987) Draft publication prepared by the RJ Reynolds Tobacco CompanyGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Perry
  • J. N. Lester
  • M. Hunter
  • P. W. W. Kirk
  • S.-O. Baek

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations