Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Physiological response to aerosol propellants.

R D Stewart, P E Newton, E D Baretta

    Environmental Health Perspectives
    |October 1, 1978
    PubMed
    Summary
    This summary is machine-generated.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    A microbial safari: finding evidence of <i>Mycobacterium bovis</i> DNA in soil from the Kruger National Park, South Africa.

    Microbiology spectrum·2025
    Same author

    A dosimetric and biological model for neutron capture therapy (NCT) experiments.

    Applied radiation and isotopes : including data, instrumentation and methods for use in agriculture, industry and medicine·2025
    Same author

    An eDNA Survey of Plant Biodiversity in a Local Dam Within South Africa's Largest City.

    Ecology and evolution·2025
    Same author

    A New Standard DNA Damage (SDD) Data Format.

    Radiation research·2018
    Same author

    Sci-Sat AM: Brachy - 06: Monte carlo DNA damage simulations of kV cbct radiation.

    Medical physics·2017
    Same author

    Strain differences in pH-sensitive K+ channel-expressing cells in chemosensory and nonchemosensory brain stem nuclei.

    Journal of applied physiology (Bethesda, Md. : 1985)·2014
    Same journal

    A New Start.

    Environmental health perspectives·2026
    Same journal

    Time-Varying Exposure to Element Mixtures and Children's Cognition at 5 Years of Age: Findings from the New Hampshire Birth Cohort Study.

    Environmental health perspectives·2026
    Same journal

    Effect of Household Air Pollution on the Gut Microbiome and Virome of Adult Women Living in Uganda.

    Environmental health perspectives·2026
    Same journal

    Comparison of Temperature-Mortality Associations across the Middle East Using Different Exposure Estimation Approaches.

    Environmental health perspectives·2026
    Same journal

    Workflow for Statistical Analysis of Environmental Mixtures.

    Environmental health perspectives·2026
    Same journal

    Effects of Extreme Heat Exposure on Heatstroke and Liver Injury in Mice: The Role of PPARα.

    Environmental health perspectives·2026
    See all related articles

    Acute exposure to common aerosol propellants like isobutane, propane, F-12, and F-11 showed no significant physiological effects. High concentrations of F-11 did cause minor cognitive decrements in some male subjects during repetitive exposure.

    Area of Science:

    • Toxicology and Environmental Health
    • Occupational Safety and Health

    Background:

    • Aerosol propellants are widely used in consumer products.
    • Understanding the physiological effects of acute and repetitive exposure is crucial for safety assessments.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To evaluate the physiological and cognitive effects of acute and repetitive exposures to isobutane, propane, F-12, and F-11.
    • To determine safety margins for these propellants at concentrations exceeding typical household use.

    Main Methods:

    • Subjects were exposed to isobutane, propane, F-12, and F-11 at concentrations of 250, 500, or 1000 ppm for varying durations (1 min to 8 hr).
    • Physiological monitoring included serial electrocardiograms (EKGs) and continuous telemetry of modified V5.
    • Cognitive tests were administered to assess potential neurobehavioral effects.

    Related Experiment Videos

    Main Results:

    • Acute exposures to all four propellants at tested concentrations did not result in significant physiological effects.
    • Repetitive exposures were also generally well-tolerated, with no measurable physiological impact.
    • A minor decrement in cognitive test performance was observed in eight male subjects repetitively exposed to 1000 ppm of F-11.

    Conclusions:

    • Isobutane, propane, F-12, and F-11 appear safe for acute and repetitive exposures at levels commonly encountered in household aerosol product use.
    • Pulmonary function and cardiac rhythm remained unaffected across all tested exposure scenarios.
    • While F-11 at high concentrations showed minor cognitive effects in a subset of subjects, overall safety margins are substantial.