The toxic equivalency factor (TEF) approach has been widely accepted as the most feasible method available at present for evaluating potential health risks associated with exposure to mixtures of dioxin-like compounds (DLCs). The current mammalian TEFs for the DLCs were established by the World Health Organization (WHO) following the meeting of an international expert panel in June of 1997. The TEFs recommended by WHO were determined based on a consensus of scientific judgment and were presented as point estimates. However, the relative potency estimates (REPs) underlying the TEFs were derived from a heterogeneous data set and often span several orders of magnitude. In this article, we present a refined database of mammalian REPs that we believe will facilitate better characterization of the variability and uncertainty inherent in the data. The initial step involved reviewing the REP database used by the WHO panel during its review in 1997. A set of criteria was developed to identify REPs that were determined to be the most representative measure of a biological response and of adequate quality for use in quantitative analyses. REPs were determined to be inappropriate for use in quantitative analyses if any of the established exclusion criteria were met. Comparison of data records to the established exclusion criteria resulted in the identification of a substantial number of REPs believed to be inappropriate for use in quantitative analyses. Next, studies published after 1997 were added to the database. The availability of such a refined database will improve risk assessment for this class of compounds by including additional information from new studies and facilitating the use of quantitative approaches in the further development of TEFs.
BackgroundFrom a mechanistic or physical perspective there is no basis to suspect that electric charges on clusters of air molecules (air ions) would have beneficial or deleterious effects on respiratory function. Yet, there is a large lay and scientific literature spanning 80 years that asserts exposure to air ions affects the respiratory system and has other biological effects.AimsThis review evaluates the scientific evidence in published human experimental studies regarding the effects of exposure to air ions on respiratory performance and symptoms.MethodsWe identified 23 studies (published 1933–1993) that met our inclusion criteria. Relevant data pertaining to study population characteristics, study design, experimental methods, statistical techniques, and study results were assessed. Where relevant, random effects meta-analysis models were utilized to quantify similar exposure and outcome groupings.ResultsThe included studies examined the therapeutic benefits of exposure to negative air ions on respiratory outcomes, such as ventilatory function and asthmatic symptoms. Study specific sample sizes ranged between 7 and 23, and studies varied considerably by subject characteristics (e.g., infants with asthma, adults with emphysema), experimental method, outcomes measured (e.g., subjective symptoms, sensitivity, clinical pulmonary function), analytical design, and statistical reporting.ConclusionsDespite numerous experimental and analytical differences across studies, the literature does not clearly support a beneficial role in exposure to negative air ions and respiratory function or asthmatic symptom alleviation. Further, collectively, the human experimental studies do not indicate a significant detrimental effect of exposure to positive air ions on respiratory measures. Exposure to negative or positive air ions does not appear to play an appreciable role in respiratory function.
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.