Best practices for promoting farmers' health: the case of arsenic history

ISSN： 0943-1853

Source： Zeitschrift fuer Gesundheitswissenschaften, Vol.15, Iss.4, 2007-08, pp. : 279-288

Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.

Previous Menu Next

Abstract

The most important sources of environmental as well as occupational exposure of man to this metalloid are connected with the mining and smelting of nonferrous metals, the burning of coal for its higher content, the mass use of arsenicals as pesticides, and in both growth stimulators and wood preservatives.The use of arsenical insecticides in agriculture decreased dramatically following the introduction of dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT), but the use of arsenical herbicides has increased. Beginning in the 1970s, the use of arsenic compounds, such as for wood preservatives, began to grow. By 1980, in the USA, 70% of arsenic had been consumed for production of wood preservatives. This practice was stopped 4 years ago, due to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ban of the arsenic- and chromium-based wood preservative chromated copper arsenate. This was, at least in the USA, an example of rational, stepwise risk management, which would mitigate exposure to arsenic for farmers and forestry and wood industry workers.The relatively frequent use of arsenic and its compounds, in both industry and agriculture, points to a wide spectrum of opportunities for human exposure; this exposure can be via inhalation of airborne arsenic, contaminated drinking water, beverages, or from food and drugs. Today, acute arsenic poisonings are mostly accidental. Considerable concern has developed surrounding its delayed effects, for its genotoxic and carcinogenic potential, which has been demonstrated in epidemiological studies and subsequent animal experiments.There is substantial epidemiological evidence for an excessive risk, mostly for skin and lung cancer, among workers exposed to arsenic. Furthermore, the genotoxic and carcinogenic effects have only been observed at relatively high exposure rates. Current epidemiological and experimental studies are trying to elucidate the mechanism for this action, pointing to the question of whether arsenic is actually the true genotoxic or rather an epigenetic carcinogen. Due to the complexity of its effects both options remain plausible. Its interactions with other toxic substances still represent another field of interest.