The effect of environmental odors emanating from commercial swine operations on the mood of nearby residents

Schiffman, Susan S.; Miller, Elizabeth; Suggs, Mark S.; Graham, Brevick G.

doi:10.1016/0361-9230(95)00015-1

Cited by 228 publications

(135 citation statements)

References 79 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

129

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In a study in North Carolina, residents of areas near swine farms reported significantly more tension, depression, anger, fatigue, and confusion at the time when odors were present than did a control group of unexposed persons. 33 In addition, retrospective studies indicate that symptom prevalence near polluted sites can significantly increase when the ambient air is odorous. 34 Finally, irritant symptoms coupled with a fear of toxicity may produce a state of autonomic arousal leading to a panic attack.…”

Section: Commentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health Survey of Residents Living Near Farm Fields Permitted to Receive Biosolids

Khuder

Milz

Bisesi

et al. 2007

Archives of Environmental & Occupational Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The authors studied the health status of residents living in Wood County, OH, near farm fields that were permitted to receive biosolids. They mailed a health survey to 607 households and received completed surveys from 437 people exposed to biosolids (living on or within 1 mile of the fields where application was permitted) and from 176 people not exposed to biosolids (living more than 1 mile from the fields where application was permitted). The authors allowed for up to 6 surveys per household. Results revealed that some reported health-related symptoms were statistically significantly elevated among the exposed residents, including excessive secretion of tears, abdominal bloating, jaundice, skin ulcer, dehydration, weight loss, and general weakness. The frequency of reported occurrence of bronchitis, upper respiratory infection, and giardiasis were also statistically significantly elevated. The findings suggest an increased risk for certain respiratory, gastrointestinal, and other diseases among residents living near farm fields on which the use of biosolids was permitted. However, further studies are needed to address the limitations cited in this study.

show abstract

Section: Commentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health Survey of Residents Living Near Farm Fields Permitted to Receive Biosolids

Khuder

Milz

Bisesi

et al. 2007

Archives of Environmental & Occupational Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Those who lived in the vicinity of the intensive hog operation reported higher frequencies of 14 of 18 physical health symptoms, especially respiratory symptoms. The Iowa study did not find an excess of mental health symptoms but, in contrast to the North Carolina study (26), it was not designed to evaluate symptoms at the time that odors were present.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Intensive Livestock Operations, Health, and Quality of Life among Eastern North Carolina Residents

Wing¹,

Wolf²

2000

Environmental Health Perspectives

124

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People who live near industrial swine operations have reported decreased health and quality of life. To investigate these issues, we survreyed residents of three rral communities, one in the vicinity of an approximately 6,000-head hog operation, one in the vicinity of two intensive cattle operations, and a third rural agricultural area without livestock operations that use liquid waste management systems. Trained interviewers obtained information about health symptoms and reduced quality oflife during the previous 6 months. We In contrast to the many studies of occupational exposures of swine confinement-house workers (9-25), only a few field studies have investigated the health effects of lower level environmental exposures. In a study of residents near hog facilities in North Carolina, Schiffman et al. (26) reported that persons exposed to odors from intensive hog operations experienced "more tension, more depression, more anger, more fatigue, and more confusion" than a group of unexposed persons. A study in Iowa (7) compared physical and mental health symptoms among people residing within a 2-mile radius of a 4,000-head swine operation and a control group in an area with no intensive livestock operation. Those who lived in the vicinity of the intensive hog operation reported higher frequencies of 14 of 18 physical health symptoms, especially respiratory symptoms. The Iowa study did not find an excess of mental health symptoms but, in contrast to the North Carolina study (26), it was not designed to evaluate symptoms at the time that odors were present.The present study addressed a number of issues raised by previous research. Unlike studies of volunteers, the sample was drawn systematically from defined populations. To increase the levels of participation and prevent exclusions based on literacy or the ability to participate in a longer study, we did not ask participants to keep a diary or respond to questions at the times that airborne emissions from livestock operations were noticeable. Instead, we asked questions about the number of times that participants experienced the symptoms of interest during the previous 6 months. Because mood disturbance and mental health effects may be acute responses to the presence of odors, we focused on physical health and quality of life rather than on short-term mood changes. We achieved high levels of participation in the study by establishing cooperative relationships with local community based organizations in planning and conducting the research.This study compared health symptoms in residents of three North Carolina communities, one in the vicinity of an intensive hog operation, one in the vicinity of two intensive cattle operations, and a third in a rural agricultural area where no livestock operations used liquid waste management systems. Although the primary motivation for the study came from an interest in airborne emissions from swine operations, the inclusion of people residing near cattle operations afforded an opportunity to examine possible health effects f...

show abstract

“…People who have preexisting respiratory problems may be particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of irritants, and can experience an increase in nasal resistance, respiration rates, and heart rates after exposures (197,198). Odorants positively or adversely affect mood and stress depending on whether the odor is perceived as pleasant or unpleasant (191,199,200).…”

Section: Environmental Dispersion Of Swine Cafo Hazardsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Concentrated Swine Feeding Operations and Public Health: A Review of Occupational and Community Health Effects

Cole¹,

Todd²,

Wing³

2000

Environmental Health Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent industry change in swine-management practices have resulted in a growing controversy surrounding the environmental and public health effects of modern swine production. The numerous wastes produced by intensive swine production not only pose a significant chalienge to effective environmental management but also are associated with decreased air quality in confinement houses, potentialy transferable antimicrobial resistance patterns, and several infectious agents that can be pathogenic to humans. Published studies have documented a variety of contaminants, microbial agents, and health efFects in those occupationally exposed to swine, and these have provided the groundwork for an increasing body of research to evaluate possible community health effects. Nonetheless, several factors limit our ability to define and quantify the potential role of intensive swine-rearing facilities in occupational and community health. Our incomplete understanding and ability to detect specific exposures; the complicated nature of disease etiology, pathogenesis, and surveillance; and the inherent difficulties assodated with study design all contribute to the inadequate level ofknowledge that currendy prevails. However, an evaluation ofthe published literature, and a recognition of the elements that may be compromising these studies, provides the foundation from which future studies may develop.

show abstract

The effect of environmental odors emanating from commercial swine operations on the mood of nearby residents

Cited by 228 publications

References 79 publications

Health Survey of Residents Living Near Farm Fields Permitted to Receive Biosolids

Health Survey of Residents Living Near Farm Fields Permitted to Receive Biosolids

Intensive Livestock Operations, Health, and Quality of Life among Eastern North Carolina Residents

Concentrated Swine Feeding Operations and Public Health: A Review of Occupational and Community Health Effects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About