Applicators of chlorpyrifos, fluvalinate, and ethazol to ornamentals in a Florida greenhouse were monitored for exposure in a replicated experiment. Pesticide exposure was assessed, using pads placed inside and outside three types of protective coveralls. Potential total body accumulation rates, excluding hands, as calculated from outside pads, depended strongly upon the rate at which pesticide left the spray nozzles. When these total body rates were normalized for spray rate, the mean results, in mg-deposited/kg-sprayed, ranged from 166 to 1126, depending upon the compound applied and the application device. Overall penetration of pesticide through a disposable synthetic coverall was 3 +/- 1% for chlorpyrifos and fluvalinate, and 35 +/- 9% for ethazol. Penetration through a reusable treated twill coverall was 19 +/- 6% for chlorpyrifos, 22 +/- 13% for fluvalinate, and 38 +/- 5% for ethazol.
In an effort to develop protective clothing that offered improved heat dissipation characteristics to pesticide applicators, the thermal responses were collected from 54 male subjects wearing two prototypes and a typical clothing ensemble. The performance of three designs and three fabrics with known chemical protective characteristics was determined in a controlled laboratory, simulating a hot environment. Analysis of physiological and perceptual data revealed that one protective fabric offered a similar thermal comfort level as chambray, a fabric growers often wear for pesticide application, which is an ineffective barrier to pesticide penetration.
As a contribution to advancing the adoption of protective apparel, this study examines the relationship between attitudes and behavior of farmers who use pesticides and their preference in protective apparel. A mailed questionnaire to certified pesticide users provided the data for analysis. Rogers and Shoemaker's attributes of innovation (relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability, and observability) provided the framework for both attitudinal and behavioral question development. Attitude toward protection was found to be the greatest influence in behavior. Because fruit growers held the highest beliefs in protection and also took more action for protection, they would be most likely to be receptive to new ideas in pesticide protection. Education and age variables were influenced by the fact the majority of fruit growers fell into the older and less educated groups. Garments preferred recommended by all respondents were the traditional shirt, pants, and hat. Comfort was an important value influencing garment preference of all except fruit growers.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate how functional finishes and different levels of laundering affect a fabric's ability to prevent or inhibit pesticide penetration. In this study, three fabrics (cotton, cotton/polyester, and polyester) treated with selected functional finishes (durable press, soil release, and water repellent) and laundered at predetermined levels (0, 10, 30, and 50 times) were exposed to methyl parathion spray. The amount of pesticide that moved through the fabric was then measured. The amount measured was compared for different finishes and between launderings to determine the effect of these variables. The application of the pesticide was completed using an enclosed spray chamber that simulated actual field conditions encountered during air blast spraying. Water-repellent and soil-release finishes were found to increase the amount of protection provided by fabrics. Fabrics treated with the durable-press finish permitted more pesticide penetration than untreated fabrics, resulting in decreased protection. Methyl parathion penetration increased with the number of launderings of the water-repellent-treated polyester fabrics; however, laundering did not significantly affect the cotton and cotton/polyester fabrics' protective characteristics.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.