Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) poisoning involves a risk of hypoxic brain damage. Six patients who lost consciousness due to H2S poisoning are described. The symptoms varied from anosmia in the patient with the shortest but highest exposure to delayed neurological deterioration in the patient with the longest exposure. The two patients with the most serious symptoms developed pulmonary edema, which may have prolonged the hypoxia. The patients were reexaminated 5 years or more after the poisoning. The five patients who had been unconscious in H2S atmosphere for from 5 to 15-20 min showed persisting impairment at neurological and neuropsychological re-examination. Memory and motor function were most affected. One patient was seriously demented. Recent reports of large groups of H2S-poisoned workers probably underestimate the risk of sequelae, due to the inclusion of cases with exposure of short duration and lack of follow-up.

Women had a higher risk of LSP than men. Low education and poor support from superior and mental distress were found to be determinants of LSP.

A shipyard worker was poisoned by hydrogen sulfide (H2S), and rescued after 15-20 min. He regained consciousness after 2 days. Three days later his condition deteriorated, and he was more or less comatose for a month. When he woke up, he was amnesic, nearly blind, had reduced hearing, and had a moderate spastic tetraparesis and ataxia. Two months after the accident, he had greatly improved. Audiograms showed hearing loss with maximum at 2000 Hz and significantly poorer speech discrimination. EEG showed generalized dysrhythmia. At follow-up 5 years later he had not been able to resume his work, and had slight motor, memory and visual symptoms. CT and MRI showed slight cerebral atrophy. EEG and evoked responses were normal.

The relevance of particle mass, surface area or number concentration as risk indicators for health effects in non-industrial buildings has been assessed by a European interdisciplinary group of researchers (called EUROPART) by reviewing papers identified in Medline, Toxline, and OSH. Studies dealing with dermal effects or cancer or specifically addressing environmental tobacco smoke, house dust-mite, cockroach or animal allergens, microorganisms and pesticides were excluded. A total of 70 papers were reviewed, and eight were identified for the final review: Five experimental studies involving mainly healthy subjects, two cross-sectional office studies and one longitudinal study among elderly on cardiovascular effects. From most studies, no definite conclusions could be drawn. Overall, the group concluded that there is inadequate scientific evidence that airborne, indoor particulate mass or number concentrations can be used as generally applicable risk indicators of health effects in non-industrial buildings and consequently that there is inadequate scientific evidence for establishing limit values or guidelines for particulate mass or number concentrations.