Recognition and Management of Health Problems Related to Pesticide Exposure Acute & Chronic Effects

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Recognition and Management of Health Problems Related to Pesticide Exposure Acute & Chronic Effects Recognition and Management of Health Problems Related to Pesticide Exposure Acute & Chronic Effects by Marion Moses, MD For further information contact: Virginia Ruiz Dr. Marion Moses Project Coordinator Pesticide Education Center Farmworker Justice Fund, Inc. P.O. Box 225279 1010 Vermont Ave., NW, Suite 915 San Francisco, CA 94142-5279 Washington, D.C. 20005 (ph) 415- 665-4722 (ph) 202-783-2628 (fax) 415-665-2693 (fax) 202-783-2561 email: [email protected] email: [email protected] www.pesticides.org Supported by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Office of Research Development and the U.S. Health Resources and Services Administration - Border Health Program Acute and Chronic Health Effects of Pesticide Exposures by Marion Moses M.D. Pesticide Education Center Table of Contents Chapter 1 Introduction and Overview ........................................ 1-6 History, Manufacturing , Registration, Labeling, Use. Chapter 2 Exposure ..................................................... 7-23 Formulations, Agricultural and Commercial Occupational Exposures Home and Garden Exposures, Drift, Biomonitoring Protective Clothing, Laundering Chapter 3 Acute Effects ................................................. 24-48 Acute Toxicity, Allergic Dermatitis, Systemic Poisoning, Asthma Chapter 4 Children and Pesticides ......................................... 49-63 Exposure, Biomonitoring. Acute Poisoning, Asthma, Cancer Chapter 5 Chronic Effects - Cancer in Adults . 64-83 Chapter 6 Chronic Effects - Reproductive System . 84-105 Spontaneous abortion, Stillbirth, Infertility, Sterility Reproductive Tissue Levels Pesticide Residues Chapter 7 Chronic effects -Neurological . 106-116 Nerve Conduction Velocity, EEG and Evoked Potentials, Vibrotactile thresholds, OPIDN, Parkinson’s Disease Appendicies A. Inert Ingredients in Current Products . 117 B. Pesticides Banned in the U.S. ...................................118 C. Organophosphate Dialkylphosphate Metabolites . 119 D. USEPA Acute Toxicity Categories . 120 E. Cholinesterase Testing .......................................121 F. Explanation of Tables .................................... 122-123 G. EPA Pesticide Carcinogenicity Classification . 124-125 H. Teratogenic Pesticides .........................................126 Chapter 1 Introduction and Overview Pesticides are toxic chemicals deliberately released into our environment to kill or harm living things. They can also kill or harm human beings. Pesticides are ubiquitous global contaminants of air, water, rain, snow, fog, soil, land and aquatic ecosystems, even the Arctic ice pack. Pesticide residues contaminate body fluids and tissues of living creatures all over the world, including newborn babies. History: Pests were considered as biblical type plaguesa until the French began using lime sulfur to control downy mildew on grapes in 1854. Chemical pest control began in the U.S. in 1867 with the use of Paris Green (copper-acetoarsenite) for control of the Colorado potato beetle. The discovery of Bordeaux mix (hydrated lime and copper sulfate) in 1880 led to the manufacture of metal based compounds for use in agriculture1. Aircraft were first used to spray crops in Europe in 1922, and in the U.S. in 1926b. Some Landmarks in Pest Control In 1939, the Swiss chemist Paul Muller discovered the insecticidal properties of DDT, for which he received the 1948 Nobel prize. The success of DDT in 1854 Use of lime sulfur as a averting typhus outbreaks during World War II made it the first war in fungicide on grapes in history in which more soldiers died of their wounds than of disease2. German France scientists experimenting with nerve-gas during World War II synthesized the 1867 Use of Paris Green against first organophosphate insecticide, parathion, marketed in 1943. The Dow the Colorado potato beetle in Chemical Company introduced the phenoxy herbicides 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T the U.S. (constituents of Agent Orange) in the 1940s. DDT came onto the U.S. market 1880 Discovery of Bordeaux mixture. in 1945 after the war embargo was lifted 1926 First use of aircraft to apply pesticides in the U.S.b Farmers saw insects and weeds that had been plagues for known human 1939 Discovery of insecticidal history, succumb to these miracle chemicals. DDT was promoted as “a boon properties of DDT to all mankind” (1946 advertisement in “Time” magazine). The World 1940s Marketing of DDT, parathion, Health Organization was so impressed with DDT’s effect on the anopheles 2,4-D, and 2,4,5-T. mosquito, it even thought (incorrectly) that the insecticide would eliminate 1947 Passage of FIFRA (Federal malaria by 1955. Chemicals dominated university research in entomology Insecticide, Fungicide, and and agronomy for decades. Agricultural chemical companies were the main Rodenticide Act). source of funds for the research and support of graduate students. 1962 Publication of Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring Resistance and Secondary Outbreaks: Two major problems were soon 1970 Creation of theEnvironmental apparent – resistance and secondary outbreaks. Not all pests were killed by the potent biocides. A very small number of survivors passed their resistance Protection Agency. on to future generations. Larger amounts of increasingly toxic combinations 1972 Authority for administration of of pesticides were needed to combat resistance. Over time many pests could FIFRA passed from USDA to not be controlled at all, beginning the search for the next generation of the EPA. chemicals. 1975 Passage of major amendments to FIFRA The other major problem was the broad spectrum of pesticide activity. They 1996 Passage of the Food Quality not only killed the “bad” insects, but also their natural predators, the “good” Protection Act amendments to ones. Insects that had been kept under control by natural predators for FIFRA. centuries became major pests themselves, resulting in severe secondary outbreaks requiring even more pesticides to control. The more pesticides were used, the more were needed, and use skyrocketed. This led to what a biocontrol expert called “the pesticide treadmill”3. Effects on Non-target Species: The new biocides caused many occupational, accidental, animal and wildlife poisonings and deaths, and widespread contamination of food, water, and the ecosystem. Concerns about potential human health and ecosystem impacts were countered by warnings from the agricultural chemical industry, farm interests, and Departments of Agriculture that mass starvation and untold deaths from disease would result if practices were changed. Agricultural production values dominated the debate in legislatures throughout the world. The toxic agricultural infrastructure, and the unecological monoculture that both fed and resulted from it, continued to expand. a The Spanish word for pesticide – plaguicida – reflects this. b Delta Airlines started as a company spraying arsenate insecticides on cotton for boll weevil control in the southern U.S.. Marion Moses M.D. Pesticide Education Center 1 Silent Spring: In 1962, Rachel Carson’s book Silent Spring4 dramatically changed the way the world thought about pesticides. A wildlife biologist, Carson described the devastating ecological effects of DDT and related pesticides she called “elixirs of death”. She raised public awareness of the interdependence of all life-systems and concerns about potential human health effects. She was the birth mother of the environmental movement. Fallout from the book jolted legislators out of their torpor, and provided grist to the environmentalist mill that grinds to this day. Pesticide Regulation: In the 1970s, the first attempts to fix the more egregious deficiencies in pesticide law began. In 1972, authority for the regulation of pesticide production and use passed from the U.S. Department of Agriculture to the U.S. Environmental Protection Figure 1 Agency (EPA) formed in 1970. In 1975, major amendments to FIFRA (the Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act) required reevaluation by 1985 of all registered products then on the market. Studies of potential chronic effects, including cancer, birth defects, neurological damage, and genetic damage in laboratory animals became requirements for registration of pesticides. Hundreds of thousands of products remained on the market in scientific limbo, during a lengthy and often litigious process. The 1985 deadline was continually extended by Congress, and some pesticides registered before 1984 have still not yet been evaluated for chronic health effects. In 1996, the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) amendments to FIFRA and the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) Figure 2 began another major reevaluation process. FQPA requires a reassessment of all food tolerances (the maximum amount of pesticide residues allowed on food), by replacing FIFRA’s cost-benefit analysis with a “reasonable certainty of no harm” standard. The EPA was required to take three additional steps to determine whether a pesticide met this new health-based standard: (1).Take into account aggregate exposure from food, water, and home and garden uses; (2). Add an additional ten-fold margin of safety (or higher if necessary), to protect infants and children; (3). Consider cumulative risks from all pesticides which have a common mechanism of activity; for example, organophosphates insecticides, which have the same basic mechanism of toxicity and biological activity5. To date 4,000 of the 9,721 tolerances requiring reassessment have been completed6. Pesticide Registration: All pesticides products must be
Recommended publications
  • “Baits and Baiting Strategies for Multi-Species Pest Control and Feral
    Baits and baiting strategies for multi-species pest control and feral cats SCIENCE FOR CONSERVATION: 40 D.R. Morgan, J. Innes, C. Ryan, L. Meikle Published by Department of Conservation P.O. Box 10-420 Wellington, New Zealand 1 Science for Conservation presents the results of investigations contracted to science providers outside the Department of Conservation. Reports are subject to peer review within the Department and, in some instances, to a review from outside both the Department and the science providers. November 1996, Department of Conservation ISSN 1173-2946 ISBN 0-478-01855-X This publication originated from work done under Department of Conservation contract 1748 carried out by D.R. Morgan, J. Innes and C. Ryan, Manaaki Whenua – Landcare Research, P.O. Box 69, Lincoln; and contract 617, carried out by D.R. Morgan and L. Meikle, Manaaki Whenua – Landcare Research, P.O. box 31-011, Christchurch. It was approved for publication by the Director, Science and Research Division, Department of Conservation, Wellington. Cataloguing-in-Publication data Baits and baiting strategies for multi-species pest control and feral cats / D.R. Morgan ... {et al.} Wellington, N.Z. : Dept. of Conservation, 1996. 1 v. ; 30 cm. (Science for conservation, 1173-2946 ; 40.) Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 047801855X 1. Pests- -Control- -New Zealand. I. Morgan, D.R. (David Rowland), 1950- II. Series: Science for conservation (Wellington, N.Z.) ; 40. 632.9510993 20 zbn96-124202 2 CONTENTS PART 1: DEVELOPMENT OF MULTI-SPECIES BAITING (D.R. Morgan, J. Innes, C. Ryan) Abstract 5 1. Introduction 5 2. Background 6 3. Objectives 6 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Fluoride (Developmental Neurotoxicity and Endocrine Disruption)
    Bill Osmunson DDS, MPH November 6, 2015 [email protected] Dr. Kristina Thayer Director, Office of Health Assessment and Translation National Toxicology Program Email: [email protected] (1) DATA ON CURRENT PRODUCTION, USE PATTERNS, AND HUMAN EXPOSURE A. The FDA approved fluoride toothpaste caution, “Do Not Swallow.” No safe dosage or amount is stated. “Do Not Swallow” is simple to understand. Use a pea or smear size and if more than used for brushing is swallowed, contact the poison control center. A quarter milligram of fluoride is in a pea size of fluoride toothpaste, the same amount found in each 11 oz glass of 0.7 ppm fluoridated public water. Fluoridated water is dispensed to everyone without regards for other fluoride exposures, individual consent, health, or sensitivity. The only safe amount of fluoride is, “Do Not Swallow.” Swallowing fluoride is not safe, however, many children swallow their toothpaste due to taste and the swallow reflex is part of the spitting action. B. Fluoridated water is the primary source of fluoride for many people. Fluoridated toothpaste is considered the second primary source and for some is more than fluoridated water. Other significant sources of fluoride include bone meal, mechanically deboned meat, grape products with cryolite, several legend drugs and sulfuryl fluoride, a post harvest fumigant. C. The FDA sent a letter to about 35 fluoride supplement manufacturers, “. there is no substantial evidence of drug effectiveness as prescribed, recommended or suggested in its labeling. .” (Drug Therapy
    [Show full text]
  • I. Signal Words and Warning Signs
    1 I. SIGNAL WORDS AND WARNING SIGNS Signal words are required on nearly all pesticide products registered and labeled for sale in the United States. The signal word gives a pesticide user a way to quickly assess the relative hazard level associated with using a product. There are three signal words in use today: CAUTION, WARNING and DANGER. note: The value “Oral LD50” (Low Dose 50) is a measurement of amount of pesticide (mg/kg) that kills 50 out of 100 laboratory animals that are force fed the pesticide under study. 2 These three signal words are associated with toxicity categories established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). These four categories can be roughly described as: o Toxicity category I is Highly toxic and Severely irritating, o Toxicity category II is Moderately toxic and Moderately irritating, o Toxicity category III is Slightly toxic and Slightly irritating, o Toxicity category IV is practically non-toxic and not an irritant. LD50/LC50: A common measure of acute toxicity is the lethal dose (LD50) or lethal concentration (LC50) that causes death (resulting from a single or limited exposure) in 50 percent of the treated animals. LD50 is generally expressed as the dose in milligrams (mg) of chemical per kilogram (kg) of body weight. LC50 is often expressed as mg of chemical per volume (e.g., liter (L)) of medium (i.e., air or water) the organism is exposed to. Chemicals are considered highly toxic when the LD50/LC50 is small and practically non-toxic when the value is large. However, the LD50/LC50 does not reflect any effects from long-term exposure (i.e., cancer, birth defects or reproductive toxicity) that may occur at levels below those that cause death.
    [Show full text]
  • Residual Fluoride in Food Fumigated with Sulfuryl Fluoride
    Fluoride 2005;38(3):175–177 Editorial 175 RESIDUAL FLUORIDE IN FOOD FUMIGATED WITH SULFURYL FLUORIDE SUMMARY: New US federal allowances for inorganic fluoride residues in food fumigated with sulfuryl fluoride are excessively high and are at levels known to cause serious adverse health effects, including crippling skeletal fluorosis. Fluoride in food has long been recognized as a potential source of adverse health effects including dental fluorosis, bone and joint defects, gastrointestinal disturbances, and muscular-neurological disorders,1-2 plus even crippling skeletal fluorosis.3 In China, food contaminated by fluoride (F) from unvented coal burning used to dry and preserve grains and other crops is an important source of F intake,4 and F levels from such exposure ranging from 18 to 87 ppm in corn and 114 to 1109 ppm in chili have been reported.5 In these coal-burning F-endemic areas, even with very little F in the drinking water, the total daily F intake by affected adults has been estimated to be between 6.12 and 9.65 mg, with the major contribution coming from food.5 By contrast, in non-endemic areas, daily F intake was estimated to be only 0.8 mg/day.5 Therefore, any appreciable increase in F intake resulting from commercial food fumigation procedures can only be viewed with grave concern. In place of methyl bromide as an insecticide fumigant because of its upper atmosphere ozone depleting ability, a number of substitutes are already in use with varying results. For example, various combinations of phosphine (PH3) and carbon dioxide have been fairly successful for food as well as general fumigation, although equipment corrosion from phosphine and insect resistance to it are among its drawbacks.
    [Show full text]
  • The Persistence and Secondary Poisoning Risks of Sodium Monofluoroacetate (1080), Brodifacoum, and Cholecalciferol in Possums
    THE PERSISTENCE AND SECONDARY POISONING RISKS OF SODIUM MONOFLUOROACETATE (1080), BRODIFACOUM, AND CHOLECALCIFEROL IN POSSUMS C. T. EASON, G. R. WRIGHT, and L. MEIKLE, Manaaki Whenua - Landcare Research, P.O. Box 69, Lincoln, New Zealand. P. ELDER, Steroid and Immunobiochemistry Unit, Christchurch Health Laboratories, Christchurch Hospital, P.O. Box 151, Christchurch, New Zealand. ABSTRACT: To determine the risk of secondary poisoning for animals preying on sub-lethally poisoned brushtail possums, captive possums were treated with near-lethal doses of sodium monofluoroacetate (1080) or brodifacoum, and toxicant concentrations in blood and tissue were monitored over time. Sodium monofluoroacetate was rapidly eliminated from the blood (within three days). Brodifacoum was retained in the liver and, to a lesser extent, the muscle of possums for eight months after dosing. To determine the potential risk for animals scavenging on the carcasses of possums poisoned with cholecalciferol, cats were fed poisoned carcasses for six days. No changes in behavior, appetite, or body weight were observed. Serum calcium concentrations increased slightly, but remained within the normal range for cats. KEY WORDS: vertebrate pest control, secondary poisoning, sodium monofluoroacetate, brodifacown, cholecalciferol Proc. 17th Yertebr. Pest Conf. (R.M. Timm & A.C. Crabb, Eds.) Published at Univ. of Calif., Davis. 1996. INTRODUCTION 1995), and toxic amounts of brodifacoum may be retained Sodium monofluoroacetate (1080) has been used for in a carcass. vertebrate pest control in New Zealand since 1954. It is The existence of an effective antidote to brodifacoum currently used most frequently in aerially sown baits and in the form of vitamin Kl means that dogs that have eaten in baits in bait stations for the control of the Australian carcasses containing brodifacoum residues can usually be brushtail possum (Trichosurus vulpecula) (Livingstone saved.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Properties of Chemicals Volume 2
    1 t ENVIRONMENTAL 1 PROTECTION Esa Nikunen . Riitta Leinonen Birgit Kemiläinen • Arto Kultamaa Environmental properties of chemicals Volume 2 1 O O O O O O O O OO O OOOOOO Ol OIOOO FINNISH ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE • EDITA Esa Nikunen e Riitta Leinonen Birgit Kemiläinen • Arto Kultamaa Environmental properties of chemicals Volume 2 HELSINKI 1000 OlO 00000001 00000000000000000 Th/s is a second revfsed version of Environmental Properties of Chemica/s, published by VAPK-Pub/ishing and Ministry of Environment, Environmental Protection Department as Research Report 91, 1990. The pubiication is also available as a CD ROM version: EnviChem 2.0, a PC database runniny under Windows operating systems. ISBN 951-7-2967-2 (publisher) ISBN 952-7 1-0670-0 (co-publisher) ISSN 1238-8602 Layout: Pikseri Julkaisupalvelut Cover illustration: Jussi Hirvi Edita Ltd. Helsinki 2000 Environmental properties of chemicals Volume 2 _____ _____________________________________________________ Contents . VOLUME ONE 1 Contents of the report 2 Environmental properties of chemicals 3 Abbreviations and explanations 7 3.1 Ways of exposure 7 3.2 Exposed species 7 3.3 Fffects________________________________ 7 3.4 Length of exposure 7 3.5 Odour thresholds 8 3.6 Toxicity endpoints 9 3.7 Other abbreviations 9 4 Listofexposedspecies 10 4.1 Mammais 10 4.2 Plants 13 4.3 Birds 14 4.4 Insects 17 4.5 Fishes 1$ 4.6 Mollusca 22 4.7 Crustaceans 23 4.8 Algae 24 4.9 Others 25 5 References 27 Index 1 List of chemicals in alphabetical order - 169 Index II List of chemicals in CAS-number order
    [Show full text]
  • ( 12 ) United States Patent
    US009853326B2 (12 ) United States Patent ( 10 ) Patent No. : US 9 ,853 , 326 B2 Tokuda et al. ( 45 ) Date of Patent: Dec. 26 , 2017 ( 54 ) NONAQUEOUS ELECTROLYTE FOR (58 ) Field of Classification Search SECONDARY BATTERY AND CPC .. .. HO1M 10 /0569 ; HOTM 10 /0567 ; HOLM NONAQUEOUS - ELECTROLYTE 10 /0525 ; HOTM 4 /587 ; HOTM 4 / 134 ; SECONDARY BATTERY EMPLOYING THE HO1M 2300 /0025 ; YO2E 60 / 122 SAME See application file for complete search history . References Cited ( 71 ) Applicant: MITSUBISHI CHEMICAL (56 ) CORPORATION , Chiyoda- ku ( JP ) U . S . PATENT DOCUMENTS 5 ,580 ,684 A 12 / 1996 Yokoyama et al . (72 ) Inventors : Hiroyuki Tokuda, Ibaraki ( JP ) ; 5 , 754 , 393 A 5 / 1998 Hiratsuka et al. Minoru Kotato , Ibaraki ( JP ) ; Masahiro 6 ,001 , 325 A 12 / 1999 Salmon et al. Takehara , Ibaraki ( JP ) ; Shinichi 6 ,033 , 808 A 3 / 2000 Salmon et al. Kinoshita , Ibaraki ( JP ) 6 , 436, 582 B1 8 / 2002 Hamamoto et al. 6 , 919, 145 B1 7 / 2005 Kotato et al . 2001/ 0044051 AL 11/ 2001 Hamamoto et al. ( 73 ) Assignee : MITSUBISHI CHEMICAL 2002 / 0192564 Al 12 /2002 Ota et al. CORPORATION , Chiyoda -ku ( JP ) 2004 / 0048164 Al 3 /2004 Jung et al . 2004 / 0091786 A1 5 / 2004 Unoki et al. 2004 / 0191636 A1 9 / 2004 Kida et al . ( * ) Notice: Subject to any disclaimer , the term of this 2005 / 0008939 A1 1 / 2005 Ota et al. patent is extended or adjusted under 35 2005 /0014071 A1 1 / 2005 Noda et al. U . S . C . 154 ( b ) by 412 days. 2005 / 0084765 A1 4 / 2005 Lee et al . 2005 / 0118512 Al 6 / 2005 Onuki et al .
    [Show full text]
  • Efficacy of 3 In-Burrow Treatments to Control Black-Tailed Prairie Dogs
    EFFICACY OF 3 JN-BURROW TREATMENTS TO CONTROL BLACK-TAJLED PRAIRIE DOGS CHARLES D. LEE, Department of Animal Science, Kansas State University Research and Extension, Manhattan, KS, USA JEFF LEFLORE , East Cheyenne County Pest Control, Cheyenne Wells , CO, USA Abstract: Management of prairie dog ( Cynomys ludovicianus) movement by colony expansion or dispersal may involve the use of toxicants to reduce local populations. Hazards associated with the use of toxicants cause concern for non-target species. Applying the bait in-burrow should reduce the primary exposure of the toxicants to non-target wildlife. Some literature suggests prairie dogs will not consume bait when applied in the burrow. In this trial we compared efficacy of Rozol ® (chlorophacinone), Kaput-D Prairie Dog Bait ® (diphacinone), 2% zinc phosphide oats applied in-burrow and 2% zinc phosphide oats applied on the surface. Results are reported as change in prairie dog activity. Key words: chlorophacinone , control, Cynomys ludovicianus, diphacinone, in-burrow, management , prairie dog, toxicant , zinc phosphide Proceedings of the I 2'h Wildlife Damage Management Conference (D.L. Nolte , W.M. Arjo, D.H. Stalman, Eds). 2007 INTRODUCTION This type of controversy has lead to scrutiny Control of black-tailed prame dogs of all types of control , especially the use of (Cynomys ludovicianus) is controversial on toxicants . Although there are numerous the Great Plains. Prairie dogs have been control techniques for prairie dogs, many controlled on rangeland for many years landowner s are dissatisfied with their largely with the use of toxicants applied consistency of efficacy and ease of use . above ground (Witmer and Fagerstone Most of the literature on black-tailed 2003).
    [Show full text]
  • Veterinary Toxicology
    GINTARAS DAUNORAS VETERINARY TOXICOLOGY Lecture notes and classes works Study kit for LUHS Veterinary Faculty Foreign Students LSMU LEIDYBOS NAMAI, KAUNAS 2012 Lietuvos sveikatos moksl ų universitetas Veterinarijos akademija Neužkre čiam ųjų lig ų katedra Gintaras Daunoras VETERINARIN Ė TOKSIKOLOGIJA Paskait ų konspektai ir praktikos darb ų aprašai Mokomoji knyga LSMU Veterinarijos fakulteto užsienio studentams LSMU LEIDYBOS NAMAI, KAUNAS 2012 UDK Dau Apsvarstyta: LSMU VA Veterinarijos fakulteto Neužkre čiam ųjų lig ų katedros pos ėdyje, 2012 m. rugs ėjo 20 d., protokolo Nr. 01 LSMU VA Veterinarijos fakulteto tarybos pos ėdyje, 2012 m. rugs ėjo 28 d., protokolo Nr. 08 Recenzavo: doc. dr. Alius Pockevi čius LSMU VA Užkre čiam ųjų lig ų katedra dr. Aidas Grigonis LSMU VA Neužkre čiam ųjų lig ų katedra CONTENTS Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………………… 7 SECTION I. Lecture notes ………………………………………………………………………. 8 1. GENERAL VETERINARY TOXICOLOGY ……….……………………………………….. 8 1.1. Veterinary toxicology aims and tasks ……………………………………………………... 8 1.2. EC and Lithuanian legal documents for hazardous substances and pollution ……………. 11 1.3. Classification of poisons ……………………………………………………………………. 12 1.4. Chemicals classification and labelling ……………………………………………………… 14 2. Toxicokinetics ………………………………………………………………………...………. 15 2.2. Migration of substances through biological membranes …………………………………… 15 2.3. ADME notion ………………………………………………………………………………. 15 2.4. Possibilities of poisons entering into an animal body and methods of absorption ……… 16 2.5. Poison distribution
    [Show full text]
  • Sound Management of Pesticides and Diagnosis and Treatment Of
    * Revision of the“IPCS - Multilevel Course on the Safe Use of Pesticides and on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Presticide Poisoning, 1994” © World Health Organization 2006 All rights reserved. The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the World Health Organization concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Dotted lines on maps represent approximate border lines for which there may not yet be full agreement. The mention of specific companies or of certain manufacturers’ products does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by the World Health Organization in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. Errors and omissions excepted, the names of proprietary products are distinguished by initial capital letters. All reasonable precautions have been taken by the World Health Organization to verify the information contained in this publication. However, the published material is being distributed without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. The responsibility for the interpretation and use of the material lies with the reader. In no event shall the World Health Organization be liable for damages arising from its use. CONTENTS Preface Acknowledgement Part I. Overview 1. Introduction 1.1 Background 1.2 Objectives 2. Overview of the resource tool 2.1 Moduledescription 2.2 Training levels 2.3 Visual aids 2.4 Informationsources 3. Using the resource tool 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Training trainers 3.2.1 Organizational aspects 3.2.2 Coordinator’s preparation 3.2.3 Selection of participants 3.2.4 Before training trainers 3.2.5 Specimen module 3.3 Trainers 3.3.1 Trainer preparation 3.3.2 Selection of participants 3.3.3 Organizational aspects 3.3.4 Before a course 4.
    [Show full text]
  • 2002 NRP Section 6, Tables 6.1 Through
    Table 6.1 Scoring Table for Pesticides 2002 FSIS NRP, Domestic Monitoring Plan } +1 0.05] COMPOUND/COMPOUND CLASS * ) (EPA) (EPA) (EPA) (EPA) (EPA) (FSIS) (FSIS) PSI (P) TOX.(T) L-1 HIST. VIOL. BIOCON. (B) {[( (2*R+P+B)/4]*T} REG. CON. (R) * ENDO. DISRUP. LACK INFO. (L) LACK INFO. {[ Benzimidazole Pesticides in FSIS Benzimidazole MRM (5- 131434312.1 hydroxythiabendazole, benomyl (as carbendazim), thiabendazole) Carbamates in FSIS Carbamate MRM (aldicarb, aldicarb sulfoxide, NA44234416.1 aldicarb sulfone, carbaryl, carbofuran, carbofuran 3-hydroxy) Carbamates NOT in FSIS Carbamate MRM (carbaryl 5,6-dihydroxy, chlorpropham, propham, thiobencarb, 4-chlorobenzylmethylsulfone,4- NT 4 1 3 NV 4 4 13.8 chlorobenzylmethylsulfone sulfoxide) CHC's and COP's in FSIS CHC/COP MRM (HCB, alpha-BHC, lindane, heptachlor, dieldrin, aldrin, endrin, ronnel, linuron, oxychlordane, chlorpyrifos, nonachlor, heptachlor epoxide A, heptachlor epoxide B, endosulfan I, endosulfan I sulfate, endosulfan II, trans- chlordane, cis-chlordane, chlorfenvinphos, p,p'-DDE, p, p'-TDE, o,p'- 3444NV4116.0 DDT, p,p'-DDT, carbophenothion, captan, tetrachlorvinphos [stirofos], kepone, mirex, methoxychlor, phosalone, coumaphos-O, coumaphos-S, toxaphene, famphur, PCB 1242, PCB 1248, PCB 1254, PCB 1260, dicofol*, PBBs*, polybrominated diphenyl ethers*, deltamethrin*) (*identification only) COP's and OP's NOT in FSIS CHC/COP MRM (azinphos-methyl, azinphos-methyl oxon, chlorpyrifos, coumaphos, coumaphos oxon, diazinon, diazinon oxon, diazinon met G-27550, dichlorvos, dimethoate, dimethoate
    [Show full text]
  • The List of Extremely Hazardous Substances)
    APPENDIX A (THE LIST OF EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES) THRESHOLD REPORTABLE INVENTORY RELEASE QUANTITY QUANTITY CAS NUMBER CHEMICAL NAME (POUNDS) (POUNDS) 75-86-5 ACETONE CYANOHYDRIN 500 10 1752-30-3 ACETONE THIOSEMICARBAZIDE 500/500 1,000 107-02-8 ACROLEIN 500 1 79-06-1 ACRYLAMIDE 500/500 5,000 107-13-1 ACRYLONITRILE 500 100 814-68-6 ACRYLYL CHLORIDE 100 100 111-69-3 ADIPONITRILE 500 1,000 116-06-3 ALDICARB 100/500 1 309-00-2 ALDRIN 500/500 1 107-18-6 ALLYL ALCOHOL 500 100 107-11-9 ALLYLAMINE 500 500 20859-73-8 ALUMINUM PHOSPHIDE 500 100 54-62-6 AMINOPTERIN 500/500 500 78-53-5 AMITON 500 500 3734-97-2 AMITON OXALATE 100/500 100 7664-41-7 AMMONIA 500 100 300-62-9 AMPHETAMINE 500 1,000 62-53-3 ANILINE 500 5,000 88-05-1 ANILINE,2,4,6-TRIMETHYL- 500 500 7783-70-2 ANTIMONY PENTAFLUORIDE 500 500 1397-94-0 ANTIMYCIN A 500/500 1,000 86-88-4 ANTU 500/500 100 1303-28-2 ARSENIC PENTOXIDE 100/500 1 THRESHOLD REPORTABLE INVENTORY RELEASE QUANTITY QUANTITY CAS NUMBER CHEMICAL NAME (POUNDS) (POUNDS) 1327-53-3 ARSENOUS OXIDE 100/500 1 7784-34-1 ARSENOUS TRICHLORIDE 500 1 7784-42-1 ARSINE 100 100 2642-71-9 AZINPHOS-ETHYL 100/500 100 86-50-0 AZINPHOS-METHYL 10/500 1 98-87-3 BENZAL CHLORIDE 500 5,000 98-16-8 BENZENAMINE, 3-(TRIFLUOROMETHYL)- 500 500 100-14-1 BENZENE, 1-(CHLOROMETHYL)-4-NITRO- 500/500 500 98-05-5 BENZENEARSONIC ACID 10/500 10 3615-21-2 BENZIMIDAZOLE, 4,5-DICHLORO-2-(TRI- 500/500 500 FLUOROMETHYL)- 98-07-7 BENZOTRICHLORIDE 100 10 100-44-7 BENZYL CHLORIDE 500 100 140-29-4 BENZYL CYANIDE 500 500 15271-41-7 BICYCLO[2.2.1]HEPTANE-2-CARBONITRILE,5-
    [Show full text]