Linked to the comment below I point to a second presentation given at the same SoBRA conference mentioned earlier (Dec 2013) titled "Non-Invasive Methods for Biomonitoring Human Exposure to Trace Elements" by Dr Chris Harrington of the NHS which included a case study to investigate the effects on population health caused by mine waste contamination in São Francisco de Assis.
The paper provides some good background on methods of measurement, biomarker effects, bioaccessibility, but does highlight that currently in the UK (and I quote) it is "Ethically unacceptable to perform wide scale biomonitoring on children using invasive methods". He also discusses studies of arsenic in hair, urine and nails in a small population in Cornwall and a group in Leicester.
Watching the presentation I felt he could have spoken for considerably longer on the topic.
Regards
Chris Barrett
Associate | Environmental Consulting
Arup
8 Fitzroy Street London W1T 4BQ United Kingdom
t +44 20 7636 1531 d +44 20 7755 2447
www.arup.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Contaminated Land Management Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David Fountain
Sent: 19 February 2014 18:05
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: calculating lead screening level using JECFA 2010 findings
It would seem there is an interesting project here - comparison of mineralised areas/urban areas (with known lead levels) vs levels of blood lead in relevant children (i.e. resident in said affected area for x years).
Unless someone already knows of such a study?
Dave Fountain
Pollution Officer (Contaminated Land)
Tel. (01283) 508848
Mobile (07966) 342121
East Staffordshire Borough Council
www.eaststaffsbc.gov.uk
Follow us on Twitter @ESBCEnvHealth
If you are visiting The Maltsters please note that we have limited car parking spaces available. Bays marked ES5, 6, 7 are allocated for our Visitors ONLY. Other ES spaces are strictly for PERMIT HOLDERS ONLY.
Civil Enforcement Officers patrol this area. If there are no visitor spaces available please park at the Meadowside Leisure Centre Car Park (P&D)
-----Original Message-----
From: Contaminated Land Management Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Chris Dainton
Sent: 19 February 2014 17:42
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: calculating lead screening level using JECFA 2010 findings
Hi Gareth
I think you've got the wrong end of the stick.
As I said in my long post, I'm not disputing the latest Tox science!
I'm challenging the concept that somehow 40 mg/kg or 200/300 mg/kg calculated using current soil exposure model with robust TOX inputs is the 'safe' soil level.
If that 'were' true, then we'd see elevated blood levels in urban children as the soils they are 'actually' exposed to have levels that are in the range 500 to 1,000+ mg/kg (BGS data).
I live in an mineralised lead area: garden soils in the range 5,000 to 10,000 mg/kg are not unusual (we also have radon & cadmium!). Elevated blood lead in children is not a major concern (Derbyshire Dales have done some blood testing in local schools).
If can use the robust/valid JEFCA TDI value in a soil exposure model to calculate a soil criteria of say 40 mg/kg (based on an intake of 0.3 ug/bw-kg/day), JEFCA's own numbers predict that this intake will give rise to a blood level of 0.44 and 1.34 ug/dl.
If we then actually expose children to an urban NBC of say 810 mg/kg, then by the soil exposure model we used, the predicted blood level (including MDI) measurable in those children would be in the range 10 to 33 ug/dl.
Show me the urban blood level data (post lead in petrol) that matches this prediction. These blood levels are not being exhibited by significant numbers of urban children, therefore our approach to soil exposure model is wrong (even if the Tox data is correct).
Give my previous post another read through.
Paradoxically, if you assume an Index Dose, the risk model outputs will actually go UP as the MDI is not subtracted from the TDI (50% rule applies of course).
Chris Dainton
This e-mail and files or other data transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, disclosure, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying is strictly prohibited and you must not take any action in reliance upon it. Please notify the sender immediately and delete the message.
Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of East Staffordshire Borough Council unless explicitly stated otherwise. East Staffordshire Borough Council may monitor the contents of e-mail sent and received via its network for the purposes of ensuring compliance with its policies and procedures.
East Staffordshire Borough Council does not enter into contracts or contractual obligations via electronic mail, unless otherwise explicitly agreed in advance in writing between parties concerned.
The Council believes in being open with its information and the contents of this e-mail and any replies may be released to a third party requesting such information at a future date.
____________________________________________________________
Electronic mail messages entering and leaving Arup business
systems are scanned for acceptability of content and viruses
|