J P Grillet1, A Adjémian, G Bernadac, J Bernon, F Brunner, R Garnier. 1. Department of Occupational Medicine, Mutualité Sociale Agricole, Les Mercuriales, 40 rue Jean Jaurès, 93547 Bagnolet Cedex, France. grillet.jean-pierre@ccmsa.msa.fr
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study investigated exposure to arsenic, a carcinogenic fungicide used in wine growing. METHODS: The first phase compared urinary arsenic excretion of controls and workers exposed at the end of application. The second phase measured the increase in urinary arsenic excretion during the first day of use. RESULTS: A significant increase in urinary arsenic excretion was observed in arsenic applicators during the first phase. Urinary arsenic concentrations exceeded the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) exposure index in one-third of the workers. The second phase showed a significant increase in urinary arsenic excretion by the first day of application. A closed tractor cabin provided a protective effect, but the efficacy of individual protection equipment was not demonstrated. CONCLUSION: This study showed the difficulties of achieving the effective protection of arsenic applicators and has led to the banning of the use of arsenic in French vineyards.
OBJECTIVES: This study investigated exposure to arsenic, a carcinogenic fungicide used in wine growing. METHODS: The first phase compared urinary arsenic excretion of controls and workers exposed at the end of application. The second phase measured the increase in urinary arsenic excretion during the first day of use. RESULTS: A significant increase in urinary arsenic excretion was observed in arsenic applicators during the first phase. Urinary arsenic concentrations exceeded the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) exposure index in one-third of the workers. The second phase showed a significant increase in urinary arsenic excretion by the first day of application. A closed tractor cabin provided a protective effect, but the efficacy of individual protection equipment was not demonstrated. CONCLUSION: This study showed the difficulties of achieving the effective protection of arsenic applicators and has led to the banning of the use of arsenic in French vineyards.
Authors: Claudio Colosio; S Fustinoni; S Birindelli; I Bonomi; G De Paschale; T Mammone; M Tiramani; F Vercelli; S Visentin; M Maroni Journal: Toxicol Lett Date: 2002-08-05 Impact factor: 4.372