V A Brandt1, S Moon, J Ehlers, M M Methner, T Struttmann. 1. Kentucky Injury Prevention and Research Center, Occupational Injury Prevention Program, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Endosulfan is not a restricted use organochlorine insecticide and is currently under re-registration review. In 1993, one confirmed case and one possible case of endosulfan poisoning in agricultural workers occurred in two southeastern states. METHODS: Two cases of suspected endosulfan poisoning were investigated utilizing record reviews, blood samples, a site visit, and clothing analysis. RESULTS: Case 1 was fatal; Case 2 resulted in permanent neurological impairment. Additionally, Case 1 mixed and applied two less toxic pesticides, acephate and maleic hydrazide to tobacco plants. Both farm owners had ample opportunity for endosulfan exposure while mixing concentrated endosulfan with water and applying the solution to tobacco with boom sprayers pulled by tractors. CONCLUSIONS: Estimates of the absorbed dose of endosulfan were not available because methods to determine actual personal exposure that would be found in fat or tissue samples were not used. Health and safety issues associated with endosulfan require a closer examination. A cooperative multi-disciplinary approach to providing timely accurate education is needed to prevent pesticide poisonings. Copyright 2001 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
BACKGROUND:Endosulfan is not a restricted use organochlorine insecticide and is currently under re-registration review. In 1993, one confirmed case and one possible case of endosulfan poisoning in agricultural workers occurred in two southeastern states. METHODS: Two cases of suspected endosulfan poisoning were investigated utilizing record reviews, blood samples, a site visit, and clothing analysis. RESULTS: Case 1 was fatal; Case 2 resulted in permanent neurological impairment. Additionally, Case 1 mixed and applied two less toxic pesticides, acephate and maleic hydrazide to tobacco plants. Both farm owners had ample opportunity for endosulfan exposure while mixing concentrated endosulfan with water and applying the solution to tobacco with boom sprayers pulled by tractors. CONCLUSIONS: Estimates of the absorbed dose of endosulfan were not available because methods to determine actual personal exposure that would be found in fat or tissue samples were not used. Health and safety issues associated with endosulfan require a closer examination. A cooperative multi-disciplinary approach to providing timely accurate education is needed to prevent pesticide poisonings. Copyright 2001 Wiley-Liss, Inc.