[Research on Occupational Poisoning and Biological Monitoring]
1Department of Hygiene, Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Showa University, School of Medicine.
Objective:
A new system for the regulation of chemical substances was introduced in Japan in April 2023. Unlike delineated rules, the new system does not specify any specific measures for individual substances, but is rather based on the management of health through the voluntary implementation of measures in order to reduce exposure to all dangerous/hazardous chemical substances. Regarding specific methods, exposures will be mainly elucidated through the measurement of a work environment. However, the necessity of biological monitoring should also be considered. This study aimed to identify the importance of biological monitoring by reviewing changes made over time in biological monitoring methods used for occupational poisoning.
Method:
The study presents occupational poisoning by several compounds (methyl bromide, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and MOCA) and the corresponding biological monitoring methods utilized, as researched by the author. Changes in biological monitoring based on the history of the Study Group on Occupational Poisoning and Biological Monitoring of the Japan Society for Occupational Health are also introduced.
Results:
The areas of occupational poisoning at different times and cases of occupational cancer caused by exposure to chemical substances were presented in lectures held by the Study Group on Occupational Poisoning and Biological Monitoring. These lectures showed that although biological monitoring was previously implemented primarily by measuring the urinary metabolites of the exposed substance, the monitoring methods used have changed as the nature of exposure has changed, leading to the development of new tools that detect trace, low concentration, and mixed exposures.
Conclusion:
The health management of workers handling chemical substances at occupational sites will be shifted to autonomous management. However, it should be noted that only biological monitoring can detect and prove true exposure. Particularly, risk assessment by biological monitoring is necessary for substances that are suspected to be absorbed through the skin, and the measurement methods used should continue to be developed and refined. The significance of biological monitoring will continue to increase.
Related Concept Videos
01:36Types of Toxins
Air pollutants, primarily gases, pose significant threats to respiratory health, leading to conditions like hypoxia, lung cancer, and in extreme cases, death.
Environmental pollutants like...
01:26Toxic Reactions: Overview
Toxicity falls into two primary categories: local and systemic.
Local toxicity appears at the exposure site, such as protein denaturation caused by caustic substances.
In contrast, systemic toxicity requires the toxic agent's absorption and distribution,...
01:14Prevention of Further Absorption of Poison
01:26Standard Precaution
Hand hygiene is the most crucial means to prevent the transmission of disease. Employers are legally required to provide their workers with personal protective equipment (PPE) to minimize exposure or contact with...
01:25Transmission-based Precautions II: Airborne and Protective Environment
Airborne precautions:
Use airborne precautions when treating patients known or suspected to have diseases that spread through the air—for example, tuberculosis or measles. These organisms are present in smaller droplets expelled by an infected person and...
01:19Pharmacovigilance
This process, termed pharmacovigilance, aims to detect, evaluate, and minimize harmful effects related to medication use. The data collection for pharmacovigilance depends on spontaneous reporting systems, where healthcare professionals or patients voluntarily report suspected ADRs.
In some cases, there...