The massive exploitation of natural resources, of which tobacco and asbestos are two conspicuous, though very different examples, and the synthesis of industrial chemicals have generated new hazards and new carcinogens which have been added to older ones. The majority of the over 50 agents that have been firmly identified so far as being human carcinogens belong to the relatively new hazards, that is environmental chemicals or chemical mixtures to which humans have been exposed only during the last century and a half. They are of more importance for cancer occurring in men than in women, and there is no evidence so far that they are related to cancers occurring at some of the most common target sites in either sex. It would be mistaken to believe that complete cancer prevention could be achieved solely by controlling these new, or relatively new, carcinogenic agents, but it would be similarly wrong to deny the importance of trying to control them and of continuing to do so. The experimental approach for the identification of carcinogens has an irreplaceable role to play in preventing the dispersal into our environment of new hazards and in identifying among the chemicals already in use, those that are carcinogenic. That a closer integration between the epidemiological and the experimental approaches may succeed in substantially reducing the size of the unknown region within the spectrum of cancer‐causing factors, is today's hope that awaits confirmation. At the same time, advances in the understanding of the mechanisms underlying the different steps of the process leading to the clinical manifestation of cancer may help in the uncovering of agents and risk factors that the approaches used, at least in the way they have been used until now, may not have been apt to identify.

A consultation was undertaken to investigate the views and concerns of stakeholders in the aircraft industry about the possible harmful effects on personal health, comfort and safety of aircraft cabin environments. Stakeholders were identified from a variety of sources including Government agencies, the Internet, House of Lords inquiry, and suggestions of interviewees. They represented: aircraft crews, aircraft constructors and engineers, government departments and authorities, holiday/flight companies, insurance companies, non-governmental organisations, occupational health physicians, passenger representatives, and independent researchers and consultants. Eighty-seven were contacted of which 57 were interviewed over the telephone using a semi-structured questionnaire. Their concerns were transcribed into a standard format and analysed qualitatively. Key stakeholders, along with Government officials, were invited to a workshop to discuss and prioritize the issues raised during the interviews. The main concerns expressed by the participants fell into five main areas: deep vein thrombosis, air quality, infection, cosmic radiation, and jet lag and work patterns. In addition, a number of safety concerns were raised as well as comments on the provision of appropriate advice to passengers. It was generally felt that further research was required on each of these subjects, as well as an improvement in the quality, quantity and availability of information provided for passengers prior to boarding a flight.

Chromium in the hexavalent form, Cr(VI), has long been recognized as a carcinogen and there is concern as to the effects of continuous low-level exposure to chromium both occupationally and environmentally. This review summarizes the available exposure data and known health effects and evaluates the potential risk to human health in the United Kingdom. Chromium emissions to the environment in the United Kingdom are predominantly derived from fuel combustion, waste incineration, and industrial processes. The less toxic trivalent form of chromium [Cr(III)] is dominant in most environmental compartments, and any Cr(VI), the more toxic form, that is emitted to the environment can be reduced to Cr(III). Food is a major source of exposure to chromium, and estimated daily oral intakes for infants (1 yr), children (11 yr), and adults are 33-45, 123-171, and 246-343 micrograms/person/d, respectively. Soil ingestion, particularly common in young children, can contribute to oral intake. Inhalation is a minor route of exposure for the general population. Average daily inhalation intakes in infants can range from 0.004 microgram/d for rural infants to 0.14 microgram/d for urban infants who are passively exposed to tobacco smoke, whereas adults who live in industrialized areas and smoke may take up between 2 and 12 micrograms/d. The most serious health effect associated with Cr(VI) is lung cancer, which has been associated with some occupational exposure scenarios, whereas Cr(III) is an essential nutrient with a broad safety range and low toxicity. The human body has effective detoxification mechanisms that can reduce ingested or inhaled Cr(VI) to Cr(III). In conclusion, there is no clear evidence to relate exposure to environmental levels of chromium with adverse health effects in either the general UK population or subgroups exposed to chromium around industrialized or contaminated sites. It can be expected that an improved understanding of the relevance of possible long-term accumulation of Cr(III) in the body may facilitate a more complete assessment, in the future, of the health risks in the general population associated with environmental exposure to chromium.

The causes and effects of exposure to high levels of carbon monoxide (CO) are well documented, and many countries maintain records of annual deaths arising from CO poisoning incidents. Many such incidents are associated with the use of badly installed, poorly maintained or malfunctioning domestic combustion appliances or with the use of such appliances in poorly ventilated rooms. However, the prolonged sequelae of acute CO poisoning and the chronic effects of long-term exposure to lower levels of CO are not well understood. The home environment is particularly important because of the possibility of unrecognised long-term, low-level exposure to CO. Furthermore, the common problem of missed or misdiagnosis of CO poisoning can result in exposed individuals being given inappropriate treatment and being returned to a hazardous situation.

No abstract