Occupational Exposure of Nonsmoking Nightclub Musicians to Environmental Tobacco Smoke

Bergman, Thomas; Johnson, David L.; Boatright, Daniel T.; Smallwood, Karen G.; Rando, Roy J.

doi:10.1080/15428119691014611

Cited by 43 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Two years after the original sampling, one of the railroads was visited again and vapor-phase nicotine concentrations were (12). (Table 3).…”

Section: Rationale For Selection Of Studies Reviewedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exposure of U.S. Workers to Environmental Tobacco Smoke

Hammond¹

1999

Environmental Health Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concentrations of environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) to which workers are exposed have been measured, using nicotine or other tracers, in diverse workplaces. Policies restricting workplace smoking to a few designated areas have been shown to reduce concentrations of ETS, although the effectiveness of such policies varies among work sites. Policies that ban smoking in the workplace are the most effective and generally lower all nicotine concentrations to less than 1 pg/m3; by contrast, mean concentrations measured in workplaces that allow smoking generally range from 2 to 6 pg/M3 in offices, from 3 to 8 pg/M3 in restaurants, and from 1 to 6 pg/M3 in the workplaces of blue-collar workers. Mean nicotine concentrations from 1 to 3 pg/m3 have been measured in the homes of smokers. Furthermore, workplace concentrations are highly variable, and some concentrations are more than 10 times higher than the average home levels, which have been established to cause lung cancer, heart disease, and other adverse health effects. For the approximately 30% of workers exposed to ETS in the workplace but not in the home, workplace exposure is the principal source of ETS. Among those with home exposures, exposures at work may exceed those resulting from home. We conclude that a significant number of U.S. workers are exposed to hazardous levels of ETS. -Environ Health Perspect 1 07(Suppl 2): 329-340 (1999). http://ehpnetl.niehs.nih.gov/docs/1999/Suppl-2/329-340hammond/abstract.html

show abstract

“…Two years after the original sampling, one of the railroads was visited again and vapor-phase nicotine concentrations were (12). (Table 3).…”

Section: Rationale For Selection Of Studies Reviewedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exposure of U.S. Workers to Environmental Tobacco Smoke

Hammond¹

1999

Environmental Health Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although a number of studies have sought to determine occupational exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) through personal monitoring measurements in the United States (1)(2)(3)(4)(5), the scope of those studies has been limited, either because of the narrow geographic distribution of the study subject base or the relatively short duration (small fraction of a normal work shift) over which the samples were acquired. This article presents the overall results of two personal exposure assessment studies conducted by the author to determine ETS in occupational settings, one across broad occupational categories for a geographically dispersed subject population (6), and another in a more restricted population of what are believed to be more highly exposed workers, restaurant and tavern servers (7).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Occupational Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke: Results of Two Personal Exposure Studies

Jenkins¹,

Counts²

1999

Environmental Health Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Personal monitoring is a more accurate measure of individual exposure to airborne constituents because it incorporates human activity patterns and collects actual breathing zone samples to which subjects are exposed. Two recent studies conducted by our laboratory offer perspective on occupational exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) from a personal exposure standpoint. In a study of nearly 1600 workers, levels of ETS were lower than or comparable to those in earlier studies. Limits on smoking in designated areas also acted to reduce overall exposure of workers. In facilities where smoking is permitted, ETS exposures are 10 to 20 times greater than in facilities in which smoking is banned. Service workers were exposed to higher levels of ETS than workers in white-collar occupations. For the narrower occupational category of waiters, waitresses, and bartenders, a second study in one urban location indicated that ETS levels to which wait staff are exposed are not considerably different from those exposure levels of subjects in the larger study who work in environments in which smoking is unrestricted. Bartenders were exposed to higher ETS levels, but there is a distinction between bartenders working in smaller facilities and those working in multiroom restaurant bars, with the former exposed to higher levels of ETS than the latter. In addition, ETS levels encountered by these more highly exposed workers are lower that those estimated by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Concomitant area monitoring in the smaller study suggests that area samples can only be used to estimate individual personal exposure to within an order of magnitude or greater.-Environ Health Perspect 107(Suppl 2):341-348 (1999). http.//ehpnetl.niehs.nih.gov/docs/ 1999/Suppl-2/341-348jenkins/abstract.html

show abstract

“…During a 3-day period (July [18][19][20] in the pizzeria, the exposure was limited to 12 h to cover approximately only the opening hours from 10 a.m. to 10 p.m. The range of 24-hour concentrations varied at the four different indoor environments between 7.69 and 214.62 ÌgWm -3 (table 1).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fine Particles (PM<sub>1</sub>) in Four Different Indoor Environments

Braniš¹,

Rcaron;ezáčová²,

Guignon³

2002

Indoor Built Environ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Measurements of urban indoor fine particle <1 µm (PM₁) mass concentrations were carried out in a lecture room, restaurant and two types of office. Twenty-four-hour concentrations of PM₁ were sampled from April to July 2000 by low-volume Harvard impactors. The 24-hour concentrations were in the range from 7.69 to 214.62 µg·m^–3. The lowest average concentration was found in a non-smoking office (11.77 µg·m^–3, range 7.69–17.27 µg·m^–3), the highest concentration in a restaurant (169.09 µg·m^–3, range 131.91–214.62 µg·m^–3). In the lecturing room (average 17.98 µg·m^–3, range 11.91– 24.59 µg·m^–3), the particle concentrations corresponded to the number of people present during the day. In the offices, noticeable differences were found between working days and weekends or days when staff were not present. A strong influence of smoking on the concentrations of small particles was confirmed for the restaurant.

show abstract

Occupational Exposure of Nonsmoking Nightclub Musicians to Environmental Tobacco Smoke

Cited by 43 publications

References 0 publications

Exposure of U.S. Workers to Environmental Tobacco Smoke

Exposure of U.S. Workers to Environmental Tobacco Smoke

Occupational Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke: Results of Two Personal Exposure Studies

Fine Particles (PM<sub>1</sub>) in Four Different Indoor Environments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About