The magnitudes of pulmonary responses we previously observed (1) following 6.6-h exposures to 0.12 ppm ozone (O3) suggested that responses would also occur with similar exposures at lower O3 concentrations. The objective of this study was to determine the extent of pulmonary function decrements, respiratory discomfort, and increased airway reactivity to methacholine induced by exposure to O3 below 0.12 ppm. Separate 6.6-h chamber exposures to 0.00, 0.08, 0.10, and 0.12 ppm O3 included six 50-min periods of moderate exercise (VE approximately equal to 39 L/min, HR approximately equal to 115 bpm, and VO2 approximately equal to 1.5 L/min). Each exercise period was followed by 10 min of rest. A 35-min lunch break was included midway through the exposure. Although not intended as an exact simulation, the overall duration, intensity, and metabolic requirements of the exercise performed were representative of a day of moderate to heavy work or play. Preexposure FEV1 averaged 4.39 L, and essentially no change (+0.03 L) occurred with exposure to 0.00 ppm O3. Significant decreases (p less than 0.01) of -0.31, -0.30, and -0.54 L were observed with exposures to 0.08, 0.10, and 0.12 ppm, respectively. The provocative dose of methacholine required to increase airway resistance by 100% (PD100) was 58 cumulative inhalation units (CIU) following exposure to 0.00 ppm and was significantly reduced (p less than 0.01) to 37 CIU at 0.08, 31 CIU at 0.10, and 26 CIU at 0.12 ppm O3; reductions in PD100 are considered indicative of increases in nonspecific airway responsiveness.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

JAPCAPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:

No abstract

A number of reports have suggested that exposure to nitrogen dioxide (NO2) may cause increased airways responsiveness (AR). Twenty studies of asthmatics and five studies of healthy subjects exposed to NO2 were used to test this hypothesis using a simple method of meta-analysis. Individual data were obtained for the above studies and the direction of change in AR was determined for each subject. Only studies with available individual data were used. Subjects from these studies whose directional change in AR could not be determined were excluded. The fraction of positive responses (i.e. increased AR) was determined for all subjects within a group and tested for significance using a sign test. Data were also grouped according to NO2 concentration and by whether the exposure included exercise. There was an overall trend among asthmatics for AR to increase (60%) but this was primarily due to increased AR seen in resting exposures (70%). Among healthy subjects AR also increased with NO2 exposure but only at concentrations above 1.0 ppm. This analysis suggests that NO2 exposure causes increased airway responsiveness in healthy and asthmatic subjects but that exercise during exposure may modify this response in asthmatics.