Effects of aerosols in common use on the ventilatory capacity of the lung

Z, Skurić; Zuśkin, E; Válić, F

doi:10.1007/bf00539131

Cited by 9 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar results were obtained with CFC 12, CFC 114, and mixtures of these three propellants. Similar respiratory results were reported by Skuric et al (1975) when 17 volunteers were exposed to 3300-9500 ppm of sprays of CFC 11. Also, Graff-Lonnevig (1979) studied the effects of inhaling aerosols containing the b 2 -receptor antagonist fenoterol, or the propellant mixture alone, which contained CFCs 11, 12, and 114 in 18 children with a history of asthma.…”

Section: Human Experiencesupporting

confidence: 86%

The development of environmentally acceptable fluorocarbons

Rusch¹

2018

Critical Reviews in Toxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) were introduced in the 1930s as the safe replacements for the toxic and flammable refrigerants being used at that time. Subsequently, hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) were also developed. In addition to refrigerant applications, they were used as foam blowing agents, as solvents and as propellants for many aerosols. In the 1970s and 1980s, concern developed about their environmental impact, specifically on stratospheric ozone depletion. Industry began to consider acceptable replacements. In 1987, many of the governments of the world came together and drafted the Montreal Protocol, calling upon Industry to initially phase out production of the CFCs and later HCFCs. Within 4 months of the signing of the Montreal Protocol, the 15 global major producers joined together to form the Alternative Fluorocarbons Environmental Acceptability Study (AFEAS), which sponsored research into environmental effects and the Program for Alternative Fluorocarbons toxicity Testing, PAFT), which examined the toxicology of potential replacements for the CFCs and HCFCs. Nine replacements were identified by companies and, through this international cooperation; toxicology programs were designed, conducted, and evaluated without duplication of effort and testing; consequently these new products were introduced within less than 10 years. Indeed the Montreal Protocol has been recognized as the most appropriate international treaty to phase-down HFCs. In 2016 the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol set out a phase-down schedule for the consumption and production of HFCs. In order to reduce the consumption and emissions of high GWP HFCs. Recently lower GWP HFCs and very low GWP HFOs (hydrofluoroolefins and HCFOs (hydrochlorofluoroolefins) have been introduced into a range of applications. Summaries of the toxicology profiles of some of the original CFCs and HCFCs, the replacements and the new post-PAFT replacements are described.

show abstract

Section: Human Experiencesupporting

confidence: 86%

The development of environmentally acceptable fluorocarbons

Rusch¹

2018

Critical Reviews in Toxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This difference with the conclusions of this HRA can be explained by the differences in the selected toxicity values and by the higher maximum exposure levels determined in the present study. However, other types of studies have concluded that exposure to noncombustible air fresheners could be of concern: the measured concentrations could exceed the thresholds associated with the exacerbation of existing symptoms in people with asthma, 27,35,36 and certain epidemiological studies have identified a significant association between the use of some air fresheners and respiratory disorders during the first years of life, 37 a higher risk of breast cancer 38 and a short‐term decrease in lung ventilation capacity, 39 while toxicological studies have reported a significant association between the application of certain air fresheners and inflammatory phenomena in rats, 40 neurobehavioral effects in rats, 41 and adverse effects on the liver cells in young rats 42 . A literature review demonstrated a significant association between the use of noncombustible air fresheners and certain health effects (disorders of the respiratory system) but no causal relation was identified, 25 and other reviews indicated that the available data are insufficient to draw conclusions on the potential health effects associated with aerosol sprays 43 and essential oil air fresheners, 44 while a European collective expert assessment concluded that certain noncombustible air fresheners may cause or aggravate symptoms in highly sensitive persons and may be of concern in children 8 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sprays and diffusers as indoor air fresheners: Exposure and health risk assessment based on measurements under realistic indoor conditions

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In temperate climates, most people spend nearly 90% of their time in indoor environments, mainly at home. Consequently, the indoor air quality is a topic of major importance for public health. [1][2][3] Noncombustible air fresheners, such as sprays and diffusers (ie, not burning incenses or scented candles), are commonly applied consumer products. These products can be specific indoor emission sources of air pollutants, for example, formaldehyde, particles, and terpenes, [4][5][6][7] and are a subject of concern. [6][7][8][9] The associated risks should be better understood. 7,10 In particular, only a few health risk assessment (HRA) studies have been conducted, generally studying a limited number of products and substances based on models and laboratory measurements carried out in emission test chambers. 6,[11][12][13][14][15] This study aimed to contribute to a better characterization of the exposure and risk levels associated with the household use of noncombustible air fresheners: an HRA was conducted on fifteen noncombustible air fresheners of various types based on measurements under realistic indoor conditions (i.e., under environmental

show abstract

Organic Chlorofluoro Hydrocarbons

Gadagbui,

Onyema

2023

Patty's Toxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter is about organic chlorofluoro hydrocarbons, which are fully or partly halogenated hydrocarbons that contain carbon (C), hydrogen (H), chlorine (Cl), and fluorine (F). In the early 1930s, chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) were introduced in the 1930s as “safe” replacements for refrigerants such as sulfur dioxide, ammonia, carbon tetrachloride, and chloroform. The list was later expanded during World War II to include their use to produce insecticide aerosols to protect the troops in tropical areas against malaria and other insect‐borne diseases. Current usages include foam blowing, precision cleaning, and propellants for medicinal, cosmetic, and general‐purpose aerosols, air conditioning, and refrigeration. The expanded use of these CFCs has resulted in their emissions into the atmosphere. The CFCs have low chemical reactivity, long atmospheric lifetime, and are globally distributed. However, since they are ozone‐depleting and are also powerful greenhouse gases (GHGs), development was initiated to replace them with comparatively less ozone‐depleting and less greenhouse‐warming hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs). Subsequently, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) were developed that were both less ozone‐depleting and less GHGs accumulating. Both CFCs and HCFCs are controlled under the Montreal Protocol. The widespread use concerns about their environmental and human health effects of these substances have been extensively reviewed. This chapter updates information on the health effects of some of the major and minor CFCs, HCFCs, and HFCs, their global emissions estimates, the discrepancies, if any, between the major reporting regions and the global atmospheric emissions values, and the likely sources of the gap between the atmospheric measurements and the reported emissions.

show abstract

Effects of aerosols in common use on the ventilatory capacity of the lung

Cited by 9 publications

References 20 publications

The development of environmentally acceptable fluorocarbons

The development of environmentally acceptable fluorocarbons

Sprays and diffusers as indoor air fresheners: Exposure and health risk assessment based on measurements under realistic indoor conditions

Organic Chlorofluoro Hydrocarbons

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About