Background: In Korea, there is low awareness of the respiratory health problems caused by the use of humidifiers, leading to a lack of governmental measures.
Objectives: Studies are needed to examine the characteristics of health effects reported by people who used humidifier disinfectant (HD), including the distribution of victims.
Methods:We analyzed the distribution of health effects including lung injury that were asserted by a total of 699 individuals who registered with the first through third national programs to determine health effects associated with the use of HD.Results: We found that HD-associated lung injury (HDLI) occurred every year from 2002 through 2011, and in 2011 for 37.2% (n=96) of the total of 258 clinically evaluated HDLI victims. More than half of the victims responded that they were victimized between 2010 and 2011. This was consistent among all classifications by sex, age, HD brand and HD chemical ingredient.
Conclusion:This study assumed that the major reason for the outbreak of the health effect between 2010 and 2011 could be the variations in concentrations and physical properties related to polyhexamethylene guanidine (PHMG). Further studies are necessary to examine if some factors related to the chemical disinfectants contained in HD brands may have caused the massive outbreak of health effects including HDLI.
Objectives: The exponential growth of chemicals, an area of high concern in developed countries like the US (i.e., the Gore Initiative) and in the EU (i.e., REACH), as well as recent chemical accidents in Korea, have provoked nationwide concerns and resultant legal enforcement. This study aims to compare the laws of the Ministry of Environment (the Chemical Substances Control Act (CSCA), Act on the Registration and Evaluation, etc. of Chemical Substances (ARECS)) with those of the Ministry of the Employment and Labor (Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA)).Methods: Each law pertaining to the Ministry of Environment and the Ministry of the Employment and Labor was downloaded from the official legal information system (www.law.go.kr). The objectives of each law and the major contents related to chemical management were compared and summarized.Results: The CSCA and the ARECS are focused on the protection of people and the environment, while the OSHA relates to the protection of workers. The right to know of people and workers has been reinforced. The former two laws emphasize prevention, but the OSHA contains both preventive and post-accident measures. The role of the Ministry of Employment was reinforced with the promulgation of the CSCA and ARECS, which contain regulations such as adjacent area impact evaluation, risk control planning, chemical statistical survey and construction and operation of information, provision of risk control plans, response to chemical accidents and registration of chemical substances.
Conclusion:We found that the three laws discussed here have several similar clauses designed to protect people and the environment from risks that may be caused by the use of chemicals, even though there are some differences among them in terms of objectives and contents. This review concluded that several clauses that can be regarded as double regulation should be unified in order to minimize the waste of government administrative resources and socio-economic losses.
The aim of this study was to determine the concentrations of airborne microorganisms (bacteria, fungi, gram negative bacteria (GNB), endotoxins, and respirable suspended particles (RSPs), and their correlation with environmental parameters (temperature, humidity, and carbon dioxide levels) in duck houses. The mean concentrations of bacteria, fungi, and GNB were very high (>10 6 CFU/m 3
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.