BACKGROUND: In a previous study inverse associations between asthma and exposure to fungal spores and endotoxins in atopic farmers and positive associations with the same factors in non-atopic farmers were documented. No external reference population had been included. We, therefore, compared this farming population with the general population from an adjacent region. METHODS: Random samples of a farming (n=2,106) and a rural (n=351) and urban (n=727) general population were selected. Atopy was assessed by serum IgE and asthma by questionnaires. RESULTS: The asthma prevalence was 4.0% among farmers, 5.7% in the rural, and 7.6% in the urban population. Atopy was similar (9-10%). Most asthmatics were not atopic, 67-75%. Farmers had asthma less often than the general population OR 0.52 (95% CI 0.36-0.75); both atopic (OR 0.33 (95% CI 0.15-0.69)) and non-atopic asthma (OR 0.60 (95% CI 0.39-0.93)). CONCLUSION: This may indicate a protective effect of the farm environment on asthma but a healthy worker effect may also play a role.
BACKGROUND: In a previous study inverse associations between asthma and exposure to fungal spores and endotoxins in atopic farmers and positive associations with the same factors in non-atopic farmers were documented. No external reference population had been included. We, therefore, compared this farming population with the general population from an adjacent region. METHODS: Random samples of a farming (n=2,106) and a rural (n=351) and urban (n=727) general population were selected. Atopy was assessed by serum IgE and asthma by questionnaires. RESULTS: The asthma prevalence was 4.0% among farmers, 5.7% in the rural, and 7.6% in the urban population. Atopy was similar (9-10%). Most asthmatics were not atopic, 67-75%. Farmers had asthma less often than the general population OR 0.52 (95% CI 0.36-0.75); both atopic (OR 0.33 (95% CI 0.15-0.69)) and non-atopic asthma (OR 0.60 (95% CI 0.39-0.93)). CONCLUSION: This may indicate a protective effect of the farm environment on asthma but a healthy worker effect may also play a role.
Authors: Lidwien A M Smit; Moniek Zuurbier; Gert Doekes; Inge M Wouters; Dick Heederik; Jeroen Douwes Journal: Occup Environ Med Date: 2006-10-03 Impact factor: 4.402
Authors: Caroline M den Hoed; Anne J Vila; Ingrid L Holster; Guillermo I Perez-Perez; Martin J Blaser; Johan C de Jongste; Ernest J Kuipers Journal: Helicobacter Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 5.753
Authors: Jane A Hoppin; David M Umbach; Stuart Long; Jessica L Rinsky; Paul K Henneberger; Paivi M Salo; Darryl C Zeldin; Stephanie J London; Michael C R Alavanja; Aaron Blair; Laura E Beane Freeman; Dale P Sandler Journal: Occup Environ Med Date: 2014-07 Impact factor: 4.402
Authors: J A Hoppin; D M Umbach; S J London; P K Henneberger; G J Kullman; J Coble; M C R Alavanja; L E Beane Freeman; D P Sandler Journal: Eur Respir J Date: 2009-06-18 Impact factor: 16.671
Authors: Jane A Hoppin; David M Umbach; Stephanie J London; Paul K Henneberger; Greg J Kullman; Michael C R Alavanja; Dale P Sandler Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2007-10-11 Impact factor: 21.405