JenniferSpartzAnnotation9NonindustrialAir

Annotation 9 The Health Effects of Nonindustrial Indoor Air Pollution This article was written by Jonathon Bernstein as well as others across the US and Helsinki. The many contributors brought together knowledge of medicine, the environment, and air quality. They were all connected to prominent schools and research groups. This article addresses the growing interest in poor indoor air quality. As people spend an average of 22 hours indoors per day, it became clearer that indoor air was also a concern in the study of asthma. The overall goal of the study was to be able to give information about indoor environmental triggers to people with allergies. This study was used to educate people about the work environment as well as the home, since the environmental exposures in non-occupational settings are not usually obvious. They also wanted to express how much outdoor pollution affected indoor air. To do this, they studied particulate matter (PM) O3, NO2, CO, SO2, VOCs, and passive smoke, which are the most common indoor air pollutants. The indoor air pollutants studied were O3, NO2, SO2, CO, VOCs, tobacco smoke and indoor PM. O3 is shown to decrease pulmonary function and exercise capability as well as increase inflammation of airways in healthy and asthmatic people. The sources are outdoor O3 and air purifiers that “have been shown to increase indoor O3 concentrations in the range of 16 to 453 ppb” (Bernstein 586). NO2 is seen to be created by gas-fueled cooking and heating appliances. It appears to increase reactions to other inhaled allergens. SO2 causes short term respiratory morbidity and mortality. The source is kerosene heaters. The CO comes from gas appliances, unvented kerosene heaters, and environmental tobacco smoke (ETS). It hinders the oxygen binding ability of hemoglobin which causes headaches, dizziness, breathlessness, and fatigue. If the exposure is high enough, it can cause comas or death. VOCs were comprised of two studies, chemical and microbial. The chemical sources are furniture, cabinetry, carpet tile, paints, and adhesives. A specific case of VOCs studied was formaldehyde. It comes from paints, insulators, and adhesives. Overall, “the combination of these chemical sources in buildings can result in the occupant being exposed to anywhere from 50 to 300 different individual VOCs” (587). There are no proven effects of VOCs, however, mucous membrane irritation, fatigue, and carcinogenicity are all attributed to them. There are more than 200 microbial VOCs (mVOCs) that are associated with fungi. Mold growth due to moisture releases mVOCs. The effects are eye, nose, and throat irritation, cough, fatigue, and nausea. Tobacco smoke releases over 4000 chemicals into the environment. Children are the most susceptible and are 1.98 times more likely to start wheezing if exposed to ETS. Indoor PM affects nasal and tracheobronchial areas. Organic pollutants contribute to these effects. The sources of PM are ETS, cooking, heating, consumer products, building materials, and dust. Another study conducted was on sick building syndrome (SBS). It is defined as poor ventilation and a large amount of occupants reporting 3 or more symptoms (sickness, fatigue, sore throat, eye or skin irritation). It is caused by problems with temperature, humidity control, lighting, sound, and stress. Indoor monitoring and maintenance was also discussed. IAQ monitoring is limited to testing what one already suspects is there or having direct readings for temperature, humidity, and compound concentrations. Buildings were said to be evaluated for construction failures causing moisture, poor ventilation, and bad or failing HVAC systems. Overall, the studies of all the indoor air contaminants were inconclusive, as many past tests contradicted one another. For example, in the study of SO2, the early studies saw that it caused bronchoconstriction in all adults; the later studies showed that 200 ppb caused no significant change in health. However, more recently, studies have shown that wheezing and chest tightness occur in nonsmoking women when the level of SO2 is raised by just 10 ppb. There were also no guaranteed ways to ensure that there were no harmful levels of compounds in the air. The trend that this study followed was the increasing interest in indoor environments and their effect on health. The authors were smart to repeatedly admit throughout the article that there were no conclusive results as many of the past studies mentioned contradicted each other. There is a lot of controversy in the study of indoor air and its health effects and this study helps prove that. This article contributes to the group study questions as it shows that the most common indoor air pollutants are known and recognized. The effects on health by indoor air quality, however, are essentially unknown. While many studies have been conducted, many contradict the findings of the others.

Citation: Bernstein, Jonathon A. et al. “The Health Effects of Nonindustrial Indoor Air Pollution.” Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 2008. 121(3). 585-591.