Respiratory effects and dust exposures in hog confinement farming

Holness, D. Linn; O'Blenis, E L; Sass-Kortsāk, Andrew; Pilger, Charles W.; Nethercott, James R.

doi:10.1002/ajim.4700110509

Cited by 89 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The mean MEF, FEF 5o ' and FEF 25 were slightly lower than the reference values but without significant differences between the three studied groups even when smoking habits were taken into account. Lung function values were also slightly lower for the reference farmers than for the pig farmers in the study of Holness et al (10). Lower lung function values were also found by Dalphin et al (3) among French dairy farmers.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 49%

“…Each dose contained 40 ug of methacholine, and the spirometric variations were recorded 2 or 3 min after cumulative doses of 80, 240, and 560 ug of methacholine. The challenge was not performed if the subject had an observed FEVlo:predieted FEV ratio of less than 70%, and it was 10 stopped after a decrease of 20% of the FEV 10' For the analysis of the methacholine challenge, we compared the prevalence of the subjects with a fall in FEV LO that was greater than 10, 15, and 20%. They were considered responders.…”

Section: Methacholine Challengementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Respiratory symptoms and bronchial reactivity among pig and dairy farmers.

Choudat¹,

Goehen²,

Korobaeff³

et al. 1994

Scand J Work Environ Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ratory symptoms and bronchial reactivity among pig and dairy farmers. Scand J Work Environ Health 1994;20:48-54. OBJECTI VES -This study assessed the prevalence of respiratory manifestations among French pig and dairy farmers and determined the relationship between bronchial reactivity and respiratory manifestations. METHODS -The pig farmers included 102 men working more than halftime inside swine confinement buildings. There were 51 male dairy farmers and 81 male referents. The demographic characteristics of the three groups were similar except for more smokers among the referents. Each subject completed a standardized questionnaire. Pulmonary function tests were performed before and after a methacholine challenge (cumulative doses 80, 240, and 560 ug), Airborne dust, ammonia, and carbon dioxide were measured inside 28 swine confinement buildings. RESULTS -The pig farmers were exposed to a total dust level of 2.4 I mg . nr-'. The respirable particle concentration was low. The pig and dairy farmers had a significantly higher prevalence of cough and morning phlegm than the referents. Before the methacholine challenge, the dairy farmers had nonsignificantly lower mean lung function values than the other groups. Among the subjects with no history of asthma, nonspecific bronchial hyperreactivity was significantly higher among the pig and dairy farmers than among the referents. There was a fall in the forced expiratory volume in I s (FEY, ,) that was greater than 10% in 6.7% of the referents, 17.9% of the swine workers, and 35.6% of the~airy farmers. This result was unchanged after adjustment for the initial FEV] o: CONCLUSIONS -The prevalence of respiratory symptoms was significantly higher among the pig' farmers without base-line lung function impairment. However, both the pig and the dairy farmers had increased bronchial reactivity.Key terms: agricultural workers, epidemiology, occupational airborne exposure.Epidemiol ogic studi es have demonst rated an increased ri sk of respiratory dysfunction am ong farmers (1---4) and, especially, am ong workers in swine co nfinement building s (5-24). Th ese studi es iden-

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 49%

Section: Methacholine Challengementioning

confidence: 99%

Respiratory symptoms and bronchial reactivity among pig and dairy farmers.

Choudat¹,

Goehen²,

Korobaeff³

et al. 1994

Scand J Work Environ Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast to the many studies of occupational exposures of swine confinement-house workers (9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(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.…”

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

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Airborne emissions from confinement houses, cesspools, and spray fields contain ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, hundreds ofvolatile organic compounds, dusts, and endotoxins. These mixtures, which cause respiratory dysfunction in hog confinement-house workers (13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28) and possibly lower level symptoms in nearby residents (29,30), are highly obnoxious odorants that affect quality of life (29)(30)(31) and may be associated with mood disorders and lowered immune function (32,3a (40). As in the case of other environmental justice problems, the presence of this polluting industry is a threat to public health because it may lower land values and quality of life and impede healthier economic developments that are needed in communities which suffer from low wages, lack of access to medical care, and poor nutritional options.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental Injustice in North Carolina's Hog Industry

Wing¹,

Cole²,

Grant³

2000

Environmental Health Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rapid growth and the concentration ofhog production in North Carolina have raised concems of a disproportionate impact of pollution and offensive odors on poor and nonwhite communities. We analyzed the location and characteristics of 2,514 intensive hog operations in relation to racial, economic, and water source characteristics of census block groups, neighborhoods with an average of approximately 500 housholds each. We used Poisson regression to evuate the etent to which relationships between environmental justicc variables and the number of hog operations persisted after consideration of population density. There are 18.9 times as many hog operations in the highest quintile of poverty as compared to the lowest; however, adjustment for population density reduces the excess to 7.2. Hog operations are approximately 5 times as common in the highest three quintiles ofthe percentage nonwhite population as compared to the lowest, adjusted for population density. The excess of hog operations is greatest in areas with both high poverty and high percentage nonwhites. Operations run by corporate integrators are more concentrated in poor and nonwhite areas than are operations run by independent growers. Most hog operations, which use waste pits that can contaminate groundwater, are located in areas with high dependence on well water for drinking. Disproportionate impacts of intensive hog production on people of color and on the poor may impede improvements in economic and environmental conditions that are needed to address public health in areas which have high disease rates and low access to medical care as compared to other areas ofthe state. Key word:. African Americans, environmental health, environmental justice, epidemiology, geographic information ystems, rural health. Environ Healh Penpect 108: 225-231 (2000). [Online 8 February 2000] hap:f/ebpnetl.niehs.nih.gor/docs/2000/108p225-2.3lwing/abstract/mtm Environmental injustice refers to the disproportionate burden of pollution on people of color and the poor (1-3). In contrast to rural America's traditional image of unspoiled territory free of industrial pollution, poor rural communities have been targeted in recent years for urban, industrial, and military wastes that are unwanted by communities with larger populations and more political power (4-). Other threats of environmental injustice in rural areas have come about because of the industrialization of agricultural activities (7,8). In this work we consider the environmental justice implications of the transformation of hog production in North Carolina from a system dominated by small independent farmers to large vertically integrated agribusiness production.Between 1985 and 1998 North Carolina moved from fifteenth to second in hog production among U.S. states, with approximately 10 million head outnumbering the state's human population of approximately 7.5 million (7,9). The expansion of production has been accompanied by a declining number of operations and an increasing average size of operations (10). In...

show abstract

Respiratory effects and dust exposures in hog confinement farming

Cited by 89 publications

References 18 publications

Respiratory symptoms and bronchial reactivity among pig and dairy farmers.

Respiratory symptoms and bronchial reactivity among pig and dairy farmers.

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

Environmental Injustice in North Carolina's Hog Industry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About