Stephan Bose-O'Reilly1, Ludovic Bernaudat2, Uwe Siebert3, Gabriele Roider4, Dennis Nowak5, Gustav Drasch6. 1. University Hospital Munich, Munich, Germany (Institute and Outpatient Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, WHO Collaborating Centre for Occupational Health). stephan.boeseoreilly@med.uni-muenchen.de. 2. United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), Vienna, Austria (Vienna International Centre). L.Bernaudat@unido.org. 3. The Health and Life Sciences University (UMIT), Hall in Tirol, Austria (Institute of Public Health, Medical Decision Making and Health Technology Assessment Department of Public Health, Health Services Research and Health Technology Assessment). uwe.siebert@umit.at. 4. University of Munich, Munich, Germany (Department of Forensic Toxicology, Institute of Forensic Medicine). Gabriele.Roider@med.uni-muenchen.de. 5. University Hospital Munich, Munich, Germany (Institute and Outpatient Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, WHO Collaborating Centre for Occupational Health). dennis.nowak@med.uni-muenchen.de. 6. University of Munich, Munich, Germany (Department of Forensic Toxicology, Institute of Forensic Medicine). drasch@allacher-apotheke.de.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Gold miners use mercury to extract gold from ore adding liquid mercury to the milled gold-containing ore. This results in a mercury-gold compound, called amalgam. Miners smelt this amalgam to obtain gold, vaporizing it and finally inhaling the toxic mercury fumes. The objective was to merge and analyze data from different projects, to identify typical signs and symptoms of chronic inorganic mercury exposure. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Miners and community members from various artisanal small-scale gold mining areas had been examined (Philippines, Mongolia, Tanzania, Zimbabwe, Indonesia). Data of several health assessments were pooled. Urine, blood and hair samples were analyzed for mercury (N = 1252). Questionnaires, standardized medical examinations and neuropsychological tests were used. Participants were grouped into: Controls (N = 209), living in an exposed area (N = 408), working with mercury as panners (N = 181), working with mercury as amalgam burners (N = 454). Chi<sup>2</sup> test, linear trend test, Mann-Whitney test, Kruskal-Wallis test, correlation coefficient, Spearman's rho, and analysis of variance tests were used. An algorithm was used to define participants with chronic mercury intoxication. RESULTS: Mean mercury concentrations in all exposed subgroups were elevated and above threshold limits, with amalgam burners showing highest levels. Typical symptoms of chronic metallic mercury intoxication were tremor, ataxia, coordination problems, excessive salivation and metallic taste. Participants from the exposed groups showed poorer results in different neuropsychological tests in comparison to the control group. Fifty-four percent of the high-exposed group (amalgam burners) were diagnosed as being mercury-intoxicated, compared to 0% within the control group (Chi<sup>2</sup> p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Chronic mercury intoxication, with tremor, ataxia and other neurological symptoms together with a raised body burden of mercury was clinically diagnosed in exposed people in artisanal small-scale mining areas. The mercury exposure needs to be urgently reduced. Health care systems need to be prepared for this emerging problem of chronic mercury intoxication among exposed people. Int J Occup Med Environ Health 2017;30(2):249-269. This work is available in Open Access model and licensed under a CC BY-NC 3.0 PL license.
OBJECTIVES: Gold miners use mercury to extract gold from ore adding liquid mercury to the milled gold-containing ore. This results in a mercury-gold compound, called amalgam. Miners smelt this amalgam to obtain gold, vaporizing it and finally inhaling the toxic mercury fumes. The objective was to merge and analyze data from different projects, to identify typical signs and symptoms of chronic inorganic mercury exposure. MATERIAL AND METHODS:Miners and community members from various artisanal small-scale gold mining areas had been examined (Philippines, Mongolia, Tanzania, Zimbabwe, Indonesia). Data of several health assessments were pooled. Urine, blood and hair samples were analyzed for mercury (N = 1252). Questionnaires, standardized medical examinations and neuropsychological tests were used. Participants were grouped into: Controls (N = 209), living in an exposed area (N = 408), working with mercury as panners (N = 181), working with mercury as amalgam burners (N = 454). Chi<sup>2</sup> test, linear trend test, Mann-Whitney test, Kruskal-Wallis test, correlation coefficient, Spearman's rho, and analysis of variance tests were used. An algorithm was used to define participants with chronic mercury intoxication. RESULTS: Mean mercury concentrations in all exposed subgroups were elevated and above threshold limits, with amalgam burners showing highest levels. Typical symptoms of chronic metallic mercury intoxication were tremor, ataxia, coordination problems, excessive salivation and metallic taste. Participants from the exposed groups showed poorer results in different neuropsychological tests in comparison to the control group. Fifty-four percent of the high-exposed group (amalgam burners) were diagnosed as being mercury-intoxicated, compared to 0% within the control group (Chi<sup>2</sup> p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Chronic mercury intoxication, with tremor, ataxia and other neurological symptoms together with a raised body burden of mercury was clinically diagnosed in exposed people in artisanal small-scale mining areas. The mercury exposure needs to be urgently reduced. Health care systems need to be prepared for this emerging problem of chronic mercury intoxication among exposed people. Int J Occup Med Environ Health 2017;30(2):249-269. This work is available in Open Access model and licensed under a CC BY-NC 3.0 PL license.
Authors: Paul Schutzmeier; Augusto Focil Baquerizo; Wilson Castillo-Tandazo; Nicholas Focil; Stephan Bose-O'Reilly Journal: Environ Health Date: 2018-02-14 Impact factor: 5.984
Authors: Mercy Wendy Wanyana; Friday E Agaba; Deogratias K Sekimpi; Victoria N Mukasa; Geoffrey N Kamese; Nkonge Douglas; John C Ssempebwa Journal: J Health Pollut Date: 2020-05-28
Authors: Sonia Mireya Diaz; Ruth Marien Palma; Maria Nathalia Muñoz; Carolina Becerra-Arias; Julián Alfredo Fernández Niño Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-03-11 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Lidia Caporossi; Silvia Capanna; Paola Viganò; Alessandra Alteri; Bruno Papaleo Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-01-11 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Mohammad H Rahbar; Maureen Samms-Vaughan; Sepideh Saroukhani; Jan Bressler; Manouchehr Hessabi; Megan L Grove; Sydonnie Shakspeare-Pellington; Katherine A Loveland; Compton Beecher; Wayne McLaughlin Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-02-03 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Hermínio Cossa; Rahel Scheidegger; Andrea Leuenberger; Priska Ammann; Khátia Munguambe; Jürg Utzinger; Eusébio Macete; Mirko S Winkler Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-02-06 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Sonia Mireya Díaz; Maria Nathalia Muñoz-Guerrero; Marien Palma-Parra; Carolina Becerra-Arias; Julián Alfredo Fernández-Niño Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2018-10-23 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Adam M Kiefer; Caryn S Seney; Evelyn A Boyd; Caroline Smith; Darran S Shivdat; Elaina Matthews; Michael W Hull; Christy C Bridges; Amber Castleberry Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-12-30 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Ann-Kathrin Schweizer; Michael Kabesch; Caroline Quartucci; Stephan Bose-O'Reilly; Stefan Rakete Journal: Environ Monit Assess Date: 2021-07-10 Impact factor: 2.513