Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
País/Región como asunto
Tipo del documento
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Environ Res ; 136: 120-32, 2015 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25460628

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Climate change is likely to increase the threat of wildfires, and little is known about how wildfires affect health in exposed communities. A better understanding of the impacts of the resulting air pollution has important public health implications for the present day and the future. METHOD: We performed a systematic search to identify peer-reviewed scientific studies published since 1986 regarding impacts of wildfire smoke on health in exposed communities. We reviewed and synthesized the state of science of this issue including methods to estimate exposure, and identified limitations in current research. RESULTS: We identified 61 epidemiological studies linking wildfire and human health in communities. The U.S. and Australia were the most frequently studied countries (18 studies on the U.S., 15 on Australia). Geographic scales ranged from a single small city (population about 55,000) to the entire globe. Most studies focused on areas close to fire events. Exposure was most commonly assessed with stationary air pollutant monitors (35 of 61 studies). Other methods included using satellite remote sensing and measurements from air samples collected during fires. Most studies compared risk of health outcomes between 1) periods with no fire events and periods during or after fire events, or 2) regions affected by wildfire smoke and unaffected regions. Daily pollution levels during or after wildfire in most studies exceeded U.S. EPA regulations. Levels of PM10, the most frequently studied pollutant, were 1.2 to 10 times higher due to wildfire smoke compared to non-fire periods and/or locations. Respiratory disease was the most frequently studied health condition, and had the most consistent results. Over 90% of these 45 studies reported that wildfire smoke was significantly associated with risk of respiratory morbidity. CONCLUSION: Exposure measurement is a key challenge in current literature on wildfire and human health. A limitation is the difficulty of estimating pollution specific to wildfires. New methods are needed to separate air pollution levels of wildfires from those from ambient sources, such as transportation. The majority of studies found that wildfire smoke was associated with increased risk of respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. Children, the elderly and those with underlying chronic diseases appear to be susceptible. More studies on mortality and cardiovascular morbidity are needed. Further exploration with new methods could help ascertain the public health impacts of wildfires under climate change and guide mitigation policies.


Asunto(s)
Exposición a Riesgos Ambientales , Incendios , Humo/efectos adversos , Australia , Humanos , Estados Unidos
2.
Environ Health Perspect ; 121(4): 447-52, 2013 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23410534

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Perfluorooctanoate (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) are persistent, synthetic industrial chemicals. Perfluorinated compounds are linked to health impacts that may be relevant to osteoarthritis, cartilage repair, and inflammatory responses. OBJECTIVES: We investigated whether PFOA and PFOS exposures are associated with prevalence of osteoarthritis, and whether associations differ between men and women. METHODS: We used multiple logistic regression to estimate associations between serum PFOA and PFOS concentrations and self-reported diagnosis of osteoarthritis in persons 20-84 years of age who participated in NHANES during 2003-2008. We adjusted for potential confounders including age, income, and race/ethnicity. Effects by sex were estimated using stratified models and interaction terms. RESULTS: Those in the highest exposure quartile had higher odds of osteoarthritis compared with those in the lowest quartile [odds ratio (OR) for PFOA = 1.55; 95% CI: 0.99, 2.43; OR for PFOS = 1.77; 95% CI: 1.05, 2.96]. When stratifying by sex, we found positive associations for women, but not men. Women in the highest quartiles of PFOA and PFOS exposure had higher odds of osteoarthritis compared with those in the lowest quartiles (OR for PFOA = 1.98; 95% CI: 1.24, 3.19 and OR for PFOS = 1.73; 95% CI: 0.97, 3.10). CONCLUSIONS: Higher concentrations of serum PFOA were associated with osteoarthritis in women, but not men. PFOS was also associated with osteoarthritis in women only, though effect estimates for women were not significant. More research is needed to clarify potential differences in susceptibility between women and men with regard to possible effects of these and other endocrine-disrupting chemicals.


Asunto(s)
Ácidos Alcanesulfónicos/sangre , Caprilatos/sangre , Disruptores Endocrinos/sangre , Exposición a Riesgos Ambientales , Fluorocarburos/sangre , Osteoartritis/epidemiología , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Cromatografía Líquida de Alta Presión , Femenino , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Encuestas Nutricionales , Prevalencia , Autoinforme , Caracteres Sexuales , Espectrometría de Masas en Tándem , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Adulto Joven
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA