Best writers. Best papers. Let professionals take care of your academic papers

Order a similar paper and get 15% discount on your first order with us
Use the following coupon "FIRST15"
ORDER NOW

Illness Associated with Drift of Chloropicrin Soil Fumigant into a Residential Area-Kern County, California, 2003 Chloropicrin is the fourth most commonly used soil fumigant in California. Exposure to chloropicrin causes eye and respiratory tract irritation, vomiting, and diarrhea Regulation (CDPR) and the Kern County Agr chl ings underscore health risks associated with fumigants and the usefulness of procedures adopted in California to ensure both prompt identification of exposure events and timely notification of the affected public This report describes an investigation by the California Department of Pesticide Comm1 KCAC ed with the site drift l of 165 pers expe ed symptoms consistent with chloropicrin exposure. The find- On October 3, 2003, an agricultural pest control service began

/in /by

Illness Associated with Drift of Chloropicrin Soil Fumigant into a Residential Area-Kern County, California, 2003 Chloropicrin is the fourth most commonly used soil fumigant in California. Exposure to chloropicrin causes eye and respiratory tract irritation, vomiting, and diarrhea Regulation (CDPR) and the Kern County Agr chl ings underscore health risks associated with fumigants and the usefulness of procedures adopted in California to ensure both prompt identification of exposure events and timely notification of the affected public This report describes an investigation by the California Department of Pesticide Comm1 KCAC ed with the site drift l of 165 pers expe ed symptoms consistent with chloropicrin exposure. The find- On October 3, 2003, an agricultural pest control service began applying 100% chloropicrin at a concentration of 80 pounds/acre to 34 acres of fallow land in Kern County. Chloropicrin was injected 17-18 inches into the soil; a weighted board was used to compact the soil, treating 18 acres. That evening, residents living one quarter mile west of the application site experienced irritant symptoms. The Kern County Fire Department (KCFD) was contacted to investigate; however, darkness, distance from the treated field, and absence of chloropicrin odor prevented firefighters from identifying the source of the irritation. Records from a weather station approximately 7 miles southeast of the application site indicated low wind speeds and stable atmospheric conditions but also that the wind direction had changed that evening, blowing from the field toward the residential dwellings The next day, chloropicrin was applied to the remaining 16 acres. A 60-foot, chloropicrin-free buffer was maintained around the perimeter of the field because workers noted a persistent odor when they arrived. Residents one quarter mile west and south of the field complained about irritant symptoms that evening. Residents notified KCFD; several responding firefighters experienced eye irritation. The wind had changed again that evening and begun blowing from the field toward the residential dwellings. Suspecting a pesticide release, KCFD notified KCAC. The field wa ompacted, and the odor c ed On October 6, KCAC notified CDPR about the incident. KCAC and CDPR conducted in-person interviews at 35 households located approximately one quarter mile west and south of the field and at a day care center; additional interviews were con ducted on Oc Representatives from each ho addit 15. The 35 households and day care c r had a t l of 172 persons present during the exposure period. In ld and the day ca nter were interviewed by using a standardized questi wo ed with the fumi ma nd KCFD r 1g ht The tigation determined that 165 persons repo rted symp oms compatible with illness ed by chlo opi age of the persons was 16 years (ra nge: 3 months-63 years). Nearly all (99%) had irritant symptoms (e.g., eye or upper respira- tory)?.. ; nine (5%) received medical evaluations. Seven had persistent respiratory symptoms when interviewed 11 days after the event. Follow-up medical care was limited because most of the affected persons lacked health insurance Source: Adapted and reprinted from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Brief report: illness associated with drift of chloropicrin soil fumigant into a residential area-Kern County, California, 2003 WR. 2004;53:740Directions: Use the case study to provide answers to the following questions. Case Study: “Illness Associated with Drift of Chloropicrin Soil Fumigant into a Residential Area—Kern County, California, 2003,” located on p. 154 of the textbook 1. Issue Identification a. What is causing the identified problem? b. Why is the problem a problem? c. How was the problem initially identified? d. What are the public perceptions of the hazard? 2. Hazard Identification a. What types of adverse health effects might be caused by the problem? b. How quickly and for what duration might the problem be experienced? 3. Dose Response Assessment a. Evaluate both qualitative and quantitative toxicity information to estimate the incidence of adverse effects occurring in humans at different exposure levels. 4. Exposure Assessment for the Relevant Population a. Determine the frequency, magnitude, extent, duration, and character of exposures to the hazard. 5. Risk Characterization a. Detail the nature and potential incidence of effects for the exposure conditions described in the exposure assessment.

 

Transcribed Image Text from this Question

Illness Associated with Drift of Chloropicrin Soil Fumigant into a Residential Area-Kern County, California, 2003 Chloropicrin is the fourth most commonly used soil fumigant in California. Exposure to chloropicrin causes eye and respiratory tract irritation, vomiting, and diarrhea Regulation (CDPR) and the Kern County Agr chl ings underscore health risks associated with fumigants and the usefulness of procedures adopted in California to ensure both prompt identification of exposure events and timely notification of the affected public This report describes an investigation by the California Department of Pesticide Comm1 KCAC ed with the site drift l of 165 pers expe ed symptoms consistent with chloropicrin exposure. The find- On October 3, 2003, an agricultural pest control service began applying 100% chloropicrin at a concentration of 80 pounds/acre to 34 acres of fallow land in Kern County. Chloropicrin was injected 17-18 inches into the soil; a weighted board was used to compact the soil, treating 18 acres. That evening, residents living one quarter mile west of the application site experienced irritant symptoms. The Kern County Fire Department (KCFD) was contacted to investigate; however, darkness, distance from the treated field, and absence of chloropicrin odor prevented firefighters from identifying the source of the irritation. Records from a weather station approximately 7 miles southeast of the application site indicated low wind speeds and stable atmospheric conditions but also that the wind direction had changed that evening, blowing from the field toward the residential dwellings The next day, chloropicrin was applied to the remaining 16 acres. A 60-foot, chloropicrin-free buffer was maintained around the perimeter of the field because workers noted a persistent odor when they arrived. Residents one quarter mile west and south of the field complained about irritant symptoms that evening. Residents notified KCFD; several responding firefighters experienced eye irritation. The wind had changed again that evening and begun blowing from the field toward the residential dwellings. Suspecting a pesticide release, KCFD notified KCAC. The field wa ompacted, and the odor c ed On October 6, KCAC notified CDPR about the incident. KCAC and CDPR conducted in-person interviews at 35 households located approximately one quarter mile west and south of the field and at a day care center; additional interviews were con ducted on Oc Representatives from each ho addit 15. The 35 households and day care c r had a t l of 172 persons present during the exposure period. In ld and the day ca nter were interviewed by using a standardized questi wo ed with the fumi ma nd KCFD r 1g ht The tigation determined that 165 persons repo rted symp oms compatible with illness ed by chlo opi age of the persons was 16 years (ra nge: 3 months-63 years). Nearly all (99%) had irritant symptoms (e.g., eye or upper respira- tory)?.. ; nine (5%) received medical evaluations. Seven had persistent respiratory symptoms when interviewed 11 days after the event. Follow-up medical care was limited because most of the affected persons lacked health insurance Source: Adapted and reprinted from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Brief report: illness associated with drift of chloropicrin soil fumigant into a residential area-Kern County, California, 2003 WR. 2004;53:740

The post Illness Associated with Drift of Chloropicrin Soil Fumigant into a Residential Area-Kern County, California, 2003 Chloropicrin is the fourth most commonly used soil fumigant in California. Exposure to chloropicrin causes eye and respiratory tract irritation, vomiting, and diarrhea Regulation (CDPR) and the Kern County Agr chl ings underscore health risks associated with fumigants and the usefulness of procedures adopted in California to ensure both prompt identification of exposure events and timely notification of the affected public This report describes an investigation by the California Department of Pesticide Comm1 KCAC ed with the site drift l of 165 pers expe ed symptoms consistent with chloropicrin exposure. The find- On October 3, 2003, an agricultural pest control service began appeared first on commompapers.org.

 
Looking for a Similar Assignment? Order now and Get 10% Discount! Use Coupon Code "Newclient"