Introduction:
Environmental pollutants, their toxicity, and the pathways into the human body pose one of most pressing concerns to scientists, the public and legislative bodies alike. PBDEs (Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers) are a brominated species that are frequently used as flame retardants (NOAA, 2017). They possess a rigid chemical structure with up to 10 bromine molecules. PDBEs, and other Brominated Flame Retardants (BFRs) are designed to delay the spread of fire, making fires more difficult to self propagate. Large amounts of energy are required to break the Bromine-Carbon bonds, thus helping to prevent the spread of fire (EFSA, 2011) . The number of bromine molecules is used to determine the use of PBDEs, as the greater number of bromines, means there is greater retardant efficiency. For example, smaller Penta-BDEs are found in furniture, cars, cushions and household goods. Whereas, Octa-BDEs are used in hard plastics and electrical appliances, such as TVs, computers and electrics (Alaee et al, 2003). in essence, their uses as flame retardants, means more often than not, they will be found within day to day goods in houses, offices and general public areas. PBDEs, PCBs and Dioxins are all considered persistent organic pollutants, due to their lengthy half life and tenancies to bio-magnify, creating widespread concern for all biota and human life.
The issues surrounding the persistence and bioaccumulation of these persistent organic pollutants poses great threat to both human and animal life across the globe, due to the potential for long range atmospheric transport. Despite the Stockholm Convention (2001) and further EU regulation, products containing these pollutants still remain in circulation (Bernes, 1998). The lack of effective legislation should be noted due to not being ratified by all participant nations. The potential for long range transport may affect populations that no longer produce PBDEs. Moreover, the long half life and emphasis on recycling materials means that these chemicals remain both a present and a future concern (WHO, 2010).
Evidence suggests that these chemicals have high neurotoxicity, genotoxicity, developmental toxicity and cause endocrine disruption. It is thought that the risks of negative impacts on children and infants may be far greater, with studies showing the transmission of PBDEs, PCBs and Dioxins into breast milk, greatly affecting new-borns and infants (Betts, 2004 and Schlumpf et al, 2010). Alternative pathways into the human body may be through inhalation, through eating or via dermal contact. They are also proved to have mutagenic and toxic effects upon the body. They have similar molecular structures to the thyroid hormone, means such pollutants may activate or block receptors, potentially creating adverse responses (Hallgren et al, 2001). In 2013, PCBs were classified as carcinogens by the International Research Agency of Cancer (IARC) and are also associated with liver damage in numerous bird and animal species (Clearwater, 2006).
This essay will aim to show the day to day interactions of humans and these harmful organic pollutants that persist due to the lack of natural mechanisms to manage them. To determine this, a ‘personal activity log’ (PAD) and a ‘personal consumption diary’ were recorded over a 5-day working week period. The PAD is focused on observing human inhalation of PBDEs across various microenvironments that one may be faced with on a day to day basis. The PCD addresses the exposure and pathway of PCBs and dioxins into the body through our diet, looking at the breakdown of different food groups. One of they key reasons for the PCD is the vast majority of exposure to PCBs and dioxins is through the food that we eat. The key contributors are usually meat, fish and dairy products.
Personal Activity Diary (PAD)
Objectives and Methods:
The PAD is designed to measure daily inhalation and exposure to PBDEs through measuring exposure in 5 unique microenvironments. The different microenvironments to be measures were cars, offices, homes, public places and the outdoors. The investigation planned looks to measure the difference in daily exposure across the 5 day working week between myself, a university student, and my father, a businessman. Our different patterns of activity and behaviour should reveal some differences between exposure to PBDEs across a day. To do this, we each recorded an activity log as to how much time we spent in each of these microenvironments, over a 24-hour period for the length of the study. Following this, the following formula was used to calculate inhalation exposure:
Inhalation Exposure = Σ[(CHFH) + (COFO) + (CCFC) + (CPMEFPME) + (COaFOa)] x IR
Where:
Σ Inhalation exposure = daily human exposure to PBDEs via inhalation of air (pg day-1).
CH/CO/CC/CPME/COa is the PBDE concentration (pg m-3) in homes/offices/ cars/public microenvironments/outdoor air, respectively.
FH/FO/CC/FPME/COa is the average fraction of time spent in each environment per day.
IR is the average daily respiration rate (m3 day-1), in an adult human. The IR is taken to be 20m3 day-1.
Following this, the result is divided by the body weight of the person (kg) completing the PAD, to determine a value for the exposure to PBDEs per Kg BW-1 day-1.
The calculations for the PAD requires the use of average PDBE concentrations in air from Harrad et al’, ‘Concentration of Polychlorinated Biphenyls in Indoor Air and Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in Indoor Air and Dust in Birmingham, United Kingdom: Implications for Human Exposure’, 2006 study.
Results and Discussions:
Table Comparing Daily Exposure to PBDEs in pg m-3 day-1, across a 5 day Working Week
Day
My Personal (uni student) PBDE Inhalation Exposure
A working Man’s PBDE Inhalation Exposure
Monday
1390.83
3014.17
Tuesday
1547.50
3592.50
Wednesday
1556.67
2390.83
Thursday
1478.33
3502.50
Friday
1618.33
2929.17
Mean
1518.33
3085.83
Figure 1: Table comparing the calculated daily inhalation exposure to PBDEs in pg m-3 day-1 between myself and my working father across the 5-day working week period. Data accurate to 2 decimal places.
Table Comparing Daily Exposure to PBDEs in Kg BW-1 day-1, across a 5 day Working Week
Day
My Personal (uni student) PBDE Inhalation Exposure
A working Man’s PBDE Inhalation Exposure
Monday
23.18
37.68
Tuesday
25.79
44.91
Wednesday
25.95
29.89
Thursday
24.64
43.78
Friday
26.97
36.61
Mean
25.31
38.57
Figure 2: Table comparing the calculated daily inhalation exposure to PBDEs in Kg BW-1Day-1 between myself and my working father across the 5-day working week period. All data is accurate to 2 decimal places.
From looking at the data collected, it is clear to note that the data collected for myself shows I am exposed to far lesser levels of PBDEs over the course of the working week, with a mean of 1518.33 pg m-3 day-1. In comparison my father, a working man was exposed to an average of 3085.83 pg m-3 day-1, over the same period of time (Figure 1). Looking at the mean results per kg of body mass, it can be seen that the data collected for my father’s activity and exposure to different microenvironments, means that he is exposed to far more PBDEs with 38.57 Kg BW-1 day-1. Contrastingly I was only exposed to an average of 25.31 Kg BW-1 day-1 (Figure 2).
Figure 3: Line Graph Comparing Daily Exposure to PBDEs in Kg BW-1 day-1, across a 5 day Working Week. The graph compares my personal exposure to that of my father.
One of the key reasons behind this is due to the greater number of hours per day that I spend outdoors in comparison to my father. PBDEs are found most frequently as a flame retardant in plastics and household goods. Given the increased amount of time I spent outside, my exposure was far lower (Appendix 2 and 3). Moreover, the car is the micro-environment which poses the greatest exposure to PBDE inhalation based on the secondary data used (Harrad et al. 2006). I personally spent no time in the car and as a result, wasn’t exposed to this source over the investigated period. Contrastingly, my father spent an average of more than 2 hours in the car each day, commuting and often travelling in between meetings, thus providing potential explanation for the difference in mean PDBE exposure (Appendix 2 and 3). It can also be noted the amount of time my father spends in office areas, spending more than 6 hours everyday. Office space accounts for the second highest amount of PDBE exposure, as seen in Appendix 1. The greatest number of hours that I personally spent in offices was 6, and this was only one occasion, with my average being 3.8 hours per day. This contrast further accounts for the difference in exposure.
With regards to the accuracy and limitations surrounding the PAD, certain assumptions needed to be made. First and foremost, the PBDE concentrations were all based on secondary data. The experimentation could have had some error or have some inaccuracies in it thus affecting my data. Moreover, the initial PBDE exposures across the varying microclimates was from a study carried out in Birmingham. My father works in London and differing geographies may have different air concentrations of PBDEs. However, it could be assumed that they are somewhat similar due to both being large industrial and polluted cities in the UK. As a result, the values calculated still have some value. Also, another small assumption regards the rounding of the number of hours. Arguably given that the time spent in each microenvironment is rounded to the nearest hour, there is added inaccuracy in this area. Finally, there is concern over the breakdown and ambiguity of the microenvironments. The broad nature meant that it was occasionally difficult to classify certain areas. For example, the use of public transport could have been classified as a car as a form of transport or a public area. This lack of clarity may have altered the results.
Conclusion:
Overall, it can be said that the data is arguably highly accurate and the differing activity patters of a working individual compared to a university show a clear spread. It is clear that the working person is exposed to a far greater amount of PBDEs within the air they regularly breathe with a mean value of 38.57 pg/Kg BW-1 day-1, compared to 25.31 pg/Kg BW-1 day-1 for the university student. Despite the limitations, assumptions and ambiguities, the calculations can also be considered accurate following T-test analysis. The result provided a significance value of 0.001 meaning there is more than a 99% that the results haven’t occurred due to chance. Therefore, we can clearly see how differing activity patterns, and behaviours with regards to living effect exposure to PBDEs and pathways into the body.
PCD:
Objectives and Methods:
The PCD is designed to calculate how dietary patterns of consumption impact human exposures to PCBs and Dioxins within the body. This was measured through breaking down and recording all food consumed into 19 different sub-groups, ranging from breads to vegetables to fish and milk products. The idea was for these 19 groups to be all encompassing and the total dietary exposure to be generated from this. Given that meat, fish, poultry and milk products account for more than 90% of dietary dioxin and PCB exposure, the planned investigation aims to looks at differences between a regular and vegetarian diet. The regular diet was to be my personal consumption and the vegetarian diet was one of my fellow housemates. Our eating habits should reveal the risks and potential exposures to PCBs and Dioxins and how differing diets, excluding or including certain food groups may alter this.
To do this accurately, a food diary was written including what and the mass of exactly what each of us ate over the 5-day investigatory period. Once completed, I summed the total mass of each food group for the day and tabulated the data, as seen in appendices 5 and 7. Once summed the following formula was used;
Dietary Exposure = Mass of food intake x concentration in of PCBs and Dioxins in Food
= Σ(Group 1 mass x Group 1 conc.) + … + (Group 19 mass x Group 19 conc.)
The mass of food = mass is Kg of each food group
The concentrations of PCBs and Dioxins for each food group were determined from secondary data sources. This was taken from the Food and Environment agency (FERA) in 2012 and the data used can be found in ‘Appendix 4’
Once this figure had been calculated, it was divided by the body weight of the person who had completed that particular PCD to calculate the Exposure per Kg in ng Kg-1 day-1.
Results and Discussions:
Table comparing the daily dietary exposure to PCBs and Dioxins, in ‘WHO TEQ’ between Myself and a Vegetarian over a 5-day period
Day
Personal Dietary Exposure to PCBs and Dioxins
Vegetarian Dietary Exposure to PCBs and Dioxins
Monday
0.059825
0.036485
Tuesday
0.063445
0.03605
Wednesday
0.054025
0.02747
Thursday
0.020495
0.03881
Friday
0.04225
0.024145
Mean
0.048008
0.032592
Figure 4: Table comparing the daily dietary exposure to PCBs and Dioxins, in ‘WHO TEQ’ between Myself and a Vegetarian over a 5-day period.
Table comparing the daily dietary exposure to PCBs and Dioxins, in ‘ng Kg-1 day-1’ between Myself and a Vegetarian over a 5-day period
Day
Personal Dietary Exposure to PCBs and Dioxins
Vegetarian Dietary Exposure to PCBs and Dioxins
Monday
0.000997083
0.000561308
Tuesday
0.001057417
0.000554615
Wednesday
0.000900417
0.000422615
Thursday
0.000341583
0.000597077
Friday
0.000704167
0.000371462
Mean
0.000800133
0.000501415
Figure 5: Table comparing the daily dietary exposure to PCBs and Dioxins, in ‘ng Kg-1 day-1’ between Myself and a Vegetarian over a 5-day period.
Figure 6: Line Graph comparing the daily dietary exposure to PCBs and Dioxins, in ‘ng Kg-1 day-1’ between Myself and a Vegetarian over a 5-day period.
From the values calculated, we can clearly see that the mean exposure to PCBs and Dioxins was far greater in my non-restrictive diet, producing a value of 0.000800133 ng Kg-1 day-1, compared to a mean of 0.000501415 ng Kg-1 day-1 across the vegetarian diet. The key reason for this is that a vegetarian diet removes all fish and meat related products, thereby removing the food groups with the greatest chemical concentrations within them. Interestingly, Thursday shows an anomaly with the vegetarian diet showing greater levels of exposure as seen in figure 4. This was because I consumed very little meat products and no fish during the day. Contrastingly, the vegetarian consumed large amounts of diary which contains greater chemical concentrations.
Looking at the assumptions that had to be made during this method of testing, there is again ambiguity and a lack of clarity surrounding the breakdown of what foods sometimes fall into each category. One particular example I noticed was Pasta. I classified it as a grain, having wheat sources but alternatively it could have been classified under bread or potatoes due to its nature. The same issue could be noted for soya and quorn products when evaluating the vegetarian diet. One issue surrounds the mass of food products. During the cooking process, it is unknown what happens to the chemicals contained inside food products and mass is often lost during the cooking process. As a result, there could be deviation given that certain food masses also needed to be assumed. This was mitigated by using the fresh weight of foods only.
Conclusions:
Overall, it can be said that diet and patterns of consumption do play a major role in determining the daily dietary exposure to PCBs and Dioxins. Vegetarianism removes the vast majority of food groups that act as a pathway for exposure to such chemicals. This can be seen with mean values per kg being significantly lower, as represented in figure 5. Interestingly, when conducting a T-test for significance, it produced a value of 0.06, meaning there is a possibility that the data occurred due to chance. However, upon removing the anomalous result on Thursday, the t-test value fell to 0.02, meaning it would be significant. Overall, once taking all limitations into consideration, it can be said that the collected data clearly expresses that a vegetarian diet significantly reduces exposure to PCBs and Dioxins.
Appendices:
PAD Appendices:
Average PBDE Concentrations in (pg m-3) across the varying microenvironments used in calculations
Microenvironment
PBDE Concentration (pg -3)
Offices
166
Homes
52
Public
112
Cars
709
Outdoors
21
Appendix 1: Table displaying the average PBDE concentrations across various microenvironments used in my calculations. The data was taken from Harrad et al, 2006 (reference below).
My PAD Table showing the breakdown in the number of hours spent in each microenvironment each day
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Offices
4
3
6
2
4
Homes
13
12
13
14
13
Public
2
6
1
6
5
Cars
0
0
0
0
0
Outdoors
5
3
4
2
2
Inhalation Exposure (pg/Kg BW-1 day-1)
23.18
25.79
25.94
24.64
26.97
Appendix 2: Table expressing the breakdown in the number of hours I spent in each microenvironment over the 5-day investigatory period. Inhalation exposure accurate to 2 decimal places
Sample Calculation for Appendix 2:
Σ[(CHFH) + (COFO) + (CCFC) + (CPMEFPME) + (COaFOa)] x IR
Σ[(52*13/24) + (166*4/24) + (709*0/24) + (112*2/24) + (21*5/24)] x IR
=[(28.17 + 27.67 + 0 + 9.33 + 4.38)] x IR
=69.55 x IR
=69.55 x 20
=1391 / Body Weight
=1391 / 60
=23.18 pg/Kg BW-1day-1 (all at 2 d.p)
My Father’s PAD Table showing the breakdown in the number of hours spent in each microenvironment each day
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Offices
9
8
9
6
6
Homes
11
10
12
10
10
Public
1
3
0
5
5
Cars
2
3
1
3
2
Outdoors
1
2
0
0
1
Inhalation Exposure (pg/Kg BW-1 day-1)
37.68
44.91
29.89
43.78
36.61
Appendix 3: Table expressing the breakdown in the number of hours my father spent in each microenvironment over the 5-day investigatory period. Inhalation exposure accurate to 2 decimal places.
Sample Calculations for Appendix 3:
Σ[(CHFH) + (COFO) + (CCFC) + (CPMEFPME) + (COaFOa)] x IR
Σ[(52*11/24) + (166*9/24) + (709*2/24) + (112*1/24) + (21*1/24)] x IR
=[(23.83 + 62.25 + 59.08 + 4.67 + 0.88)] x IR
=150.72 x IR
=150.72 x 20
=3014.4 / Body Weight
=3014.4 / 80
=37.68 pg/Kg BW-1day-1 (all at 2 d.p)
Personal Consumption Diaries (PCDs):
Table displaying the Average Concentration of PCBs and Dioxins found across the 19 measured food groups during the exposure investigation (WHO TEQ)
Food Groups
Average Concentration of PCBs and Dioxins in Food (WHO TEQ)
Group 1: Bread
0.011
Group 2: Cereals
0.013
Group 3: Carcase meat
0.077
Group 4: Offal
0.191
Group 5: Meat products
0.030
Group 6: Poultry
0.011
Group 7: Fish
0.326
Group 8: Fats & oils
0.092
Group 9: Eggs
0.044
Group 10: Sugar & Preserves
0.056
Group 11: Green Vegetables
0.005
Group 12: Potatoes
0.010
Group 13: Other Vegetables
0.053
Group 14: Canned Vegetables
0.002
Group 15: fresh fruit
0.003
Group 16: fruit products
0.007
Group 17: Milk
0.008
Group 18: Milk & Dairy products
0.105
Group 19: Nuts
0.019
Appendix 4: Table displaying average concentration of dioxins and PCBs found across the 19 different food groups in WHO TEQ. Data here was taken from the Food and Environment Agency (FERA) in 2012. (reference below)
Table Showing the Total Amount of Food consumed across each food group per day (Kg)
Food Groups
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Group 1 – Bread
0.25
0
0.3
0.2
0.2
Group 2 – Cereals
0
0
0.1
0.1
0
Group 3 – Carcase meat
0
0
0
0
0
Group 4 – Offal
0
0
0
0
0
Group 5 – Meat product
0
0
0.15
0.125
0
Group 6 – Poultry
0.15
0.15
0
0
0.15
Group 7 – Fish
0.11
0.11
0.055
0
0
Group 8 – Fats & oils
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
Group 9 – Eggs
0
0
0.12
0.12
0.12
Group 10 – Sugar & Preserves
0.02
0.025
0.025
0.03
0.02
Group 11 -Green Vegetables
0.08
0.08
0
0.05
0.24
Group 12 – Potatoes
0.075
0.33
0
0
0
Group 13 – Other Vegetables
0.23
0.16
0.1
0.035
0.42
Group 14 – Canned Vegetables
0.15
0.15
0
0
0
Group 15 – fresh fruit
0.365
0.115
0.26
0.07
0.11
Group 16 – fruit products
0
0.15
0
0.15
0.15
Group 17 – Milk
0
0.2
0.2
0.02
0.025
Group 18 – Milk & Dairy products
0
0.06
0.085
0
0.04
Group 19 – Nuts
0.05
0
0.05
0
0
Appendix 5: Table displaying the amount of food I consumed of each food group in Kg, each day over the 5-day investigatory period
Table Displaying the Exposure data to PCBs and Dioxins from the various food groups, for my Personal Consumption (ng day-1)
Monday Exposure
Tuesday Exposure
Wedensday Exposure
Thursday Exposure
Friday Exposure
Group 1 – Bread
0.00275
0
0.0033
0.0022
0.0022
Group 2 – Cereals
0
0
0.0013
0.0013
0
Group 3 – Carcase meat
0
0
0
0
0
Group 4 – Offal
0
0
0
0
0
Group 5 – Meat products
0
0
0.0045
0.00375
0
Group 6 – Poultry
0.00165
0.00165
0
0
0.00165
Group 7 – Fish
0.03586
0.03586
0.01793
0
0
Group 8 – Fats & oils
0.00276
0.00276
0.00276
0.00276
0.00276
Group 9 – Eggs
0
0
0.00528
0.00528
0.00528
Group 10 – Sugar & Preserves
0.00112
0.0014
0.0014
0.00168
0.00112
Group 11 -Green Vegetables
0.0004
0.0004
0
0.00025
0.0012
Group 12 – Potatoes
0.00075
0.0033
0
0
0
Group 13 – Other Vegetables
0.01219
0.00848
0.0053
0.001855
0.02226
Group 14 – Canned Vegetables
0.0003
0.0003
0
0
0
Group 15 – fresh fruit
0.001095
0.000345
0.00078
0.00021
0.00033
Group 16 – fruit products
0
0.00105
0
0.00105
0.00105
Group 17 – Milk
0
0.0016
0.0016
0.00016
0.0002
Group 18 – Milk & Dairy products
0
0.0063
0.008925
0
0.0042
Group 19 – Nuts
0.00095
0
0.00095
0
0
Total Daily Exposure (ng day-1)
0.059825
0.063445
0.054025
0.020495
0.04225
Appendix 6: Table displaying the calculated concentrations of PCBs and Dioxins that entered into my body from the various food groups over the investigatory period in ng day-1.
Sample Calculation for my personal PCD:
Dietary Exposure = Mass of food eaten x Concentration of PCBs and dioxins in food
Total Exposure = (Mass of food eaten x Concentration of PCBs and dioxins in food) + (Sum for each individual food group
Exposure = (0.25*0.011) + (0.15*0.011) + (0.11*0.326) + (0.03*0.092) + (0.02*0.056) + (0.08*0.005) + (0.075*0.01) + (0.23*0.053) + (0.15*0.002) + (0.365*0.003) + (0.05*0.019)
=0.00275 + 0.00165 + 0.03586 + 0.00276 + 0.00112 + 0.0004 + 0.00075 + 0.01219 + 0.0003 + 0.001095 + 0.00095
=0.059825 ng day-1
Exposure per kg = 0.059825 / Body Weight
=0.059825/60
Total Daily Exposure = 0.000997083 ng Kg-1 day-1
Table Showing the Total Amount of Food consumed by my Vegetarian Housemate across each food group per day (Kg)
Food Groups
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Group 1 – Bread
0.2
0.4
0
0.2
0
Group 2 – Cereals
0.175
0.1
0.26
0.1
0.25
Group 3 – Carcase meat
0
0
0
0
0
Group 4 – Offal
0
0
0
0
0
Group 5 – Meat product
0
0
0
0
0
Group 6 – Poultry
0
0
0
0
0
Group 7 – Fish
0
0
0
0
0
Group 8 – Fats & oils
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
Group 9 – Eggs
0.18
0.12
0
0.12
0.12
Group 10 – Sugar & Preserves
0.04
0.03
0.03
0.035
0.03
Group 11 -Green Vegetables
0.1
0.09
0.21
0.2
0.18
Group 12 – Potatoes
0
0.2
0
0.2
0.2
Group 13 – Other Vegetables
0.3
0.27
0.2
0.3
0
Group 14 – Canned Vegetables
0
0
0
0
0.2
Group 15 – fresh fruit
0.13
0.14
0.25
0.14
0.115
Group 16 – fruit products
0
0
0.15
0.14
0.15
Group 17 – Milk
0.05
0.05
0
0.15
0
Group 18 – Milk & Dairy products
0
0.02
0.05
0.02
0.04
Group 19 – Nuts
0.1
0.05
0.05
0.09
0.12
Appendix 7: Table displaying the amount of food my vegetarian housemate consumed of each food group in Kg, each day over the 5-day investigatory period
Table Displaying the Exposure data to PCBs and Dioxins from the various food groups, for my Vegetarian Housemate (ng day-1)
Food Groups
Monday Exposure
Tuesday Exposure
Wednesday Exposure
Thursday Exposure
Friday Exposure
Group 1 – Bread
0.0022
0.0044
0
0.0022
0
Group 2 – Cereals
0.002275
0.0013
0.00338
0.0013
0.00325
Group 3 – Carcase meat
0
0
0
0
0
Group 4 – Offal
0
0
0
0
0
Group 5 – Meat products
0
0
0
0
0
Group 6 – Poultry
0
0
0
0
0
Group 7 – Fish
0
0
0
0
0
Group 8 – Fats & oils
0.00276
0.00276
0.00276
0.00276
0.00276
Group 9 – Eggs
0.00792
0.00528
0
0.00528
0.00528
Group 10 – Sugar & Preserves
0.00224
0.00168
0.00168
0.00196
0.00168
Group 11 -Green Vegetables
0.0005
0.00045
0.00105
0.001
0.0009
Group 12 – Potatoes
0
0.002
0
0.002
0.002
Group 13 – Other Vegetables
0.0159
0.01431
0.0106
0.0159
0
Group 14 – Canned Vegetables
0
0
0
0
0.0004
Group 15 – fresh fruit
0.00039
0.00042
0.00075
0.00042
0.000345
Group 16 – fruit products
0
0
0.00105
0.00098
0.00105
Group 17 – Milk
0.0004
0.0004
0
0.0012
0
Group 18 – Milk & Dairy products
0
0.0021
0.00525
0.0021
0.0042
Group 19 – Nuts
0.0019
0.00095
0.00095
0.00171
0.00228
Total Daily Exposure (ng day-1)
0.036485
0.03605
0.02747
0.03881
0.024145
Appendix 8: Table displaying the calculated concentrations of PCBs and Dioxins that entered into Vegetarian Housemate’s body from the various food groups over the investigatory period in ng day-1.
Sample Calculation for Vegetarian Housemate PCD:
Dietary Exposure = Mass of food eaten x Concentration of PCBs and dioxins in food
Total Exposure = (Mass of food eaten x Concentration of PCBs and dioxins in food) + (Sum for each individual food group
Exposure = (0.2*0.011) + (0.175*0.013) + (0.03*0.092) + (0.18*0.044) + (0.04*0.056) + (0.1*0.005) + (0.3*0.053) + (0.13*0.003) + (0.05*0.008) + (0.1*0.019)
=0.0022 + 0.002275 + 0.00276 + 0.00792 + 0.00224 + 0.0005 + 0.0158 + 0.00039 + 0.0004 + 0.0019
=0.036485 ng day-1
Exposure per Kg = 0.036485 / Body Weight
=0.036485 / 65
Total Daily Exposure = 0.00056131 ng Kg-1 day-1
References:
Alaee, M. (2018). ‘An overview of commercially used brominated flame retardants, their applications, their use patterns in different countries/regions and possible modes of release’., Environmental International v29, I6, p683-689
Bernes C, 1998, ‘Persistent organic pollutants’, Swedish EPA, Sweden
Betts K, 2004, ‘PBDEs and the environmental intervention time lag’, News article in Environ. Sci. Technol. and references within. http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es040647%2B?prevSearch=PBDEs+and+the+environmental+i ntervention+time+lag&searchHistoryKey=
Clearwater, 2006, ‘What are the Human Health Effects of PCBs’
[online] Available at: http://www.clearwater.org/news/pcbhealth.html
EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2011, ‘Brominated Flame Retardants’, EFSA Publication
Accessible: https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/topics/topic/brominated-flame-retardants
Fernandes A, Rose M, Smith F, Holland M, 2012, “Organic Environmental Contaminants in the 2012 Total Diet Study Samples”, Report FD 12/04, UK Food Standards Agency
(free pdf copy downloadable at http://www.food.gov.uk/sites/default/files/research-report-total-diet-study.pdf).
Hallgren S, Sinjari T, Darnerud P, 2001,’ Effects of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) on thyroid hormone and vitamin A levels in rats and mice’, Archives of toxicology, v75 i4, p200-2008.
Harrad S, Hazrati S, Ibarra C, 2006, “Concentrations of Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in Indoor Air and Dust and Polychlorinated Biphenyls in Indoor Air in Birmingham, United Kingdom: Implications for Human Exposure”, Environmental Science and Technology, 40, 4633-4638.
NOAA, 2017, ‘What are PBDEs?’, National Ocean Service
Available: https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/pbde.htm
Schlumpf M, Kypke K, Wittassek M, Angerer J, Mascher H, Mascher D, Vokt C, Birchler M and Lichtensteiger W, 2010, ‘Exposure patterns of UV filters, fragrances, parabens, phthalates, organochlor pesticides, PBDEs, and PCBs in human milk: Correlation of UV filters with use of cosmetics’, Chemosphere v81 i10, p1171-1183
World Health Organisation, 2010, ‘Peristent Organic Pollutants: Impact on Child Health’
Available: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/44525/9789241501101_eng.pdf?sequence=1