Illnesses associated with occupational use of flea-control products--California, Texas, and Washington, 1989-1997.
(1/64)
Dips, shampoos, and other insecticide-containing flea-control products can produce systemic illnesses or localized symptoms in the persons applying them. Although these products may pose a risk to consumers, they are particularly hazardous to pet groomers and handlers who use them regularly. Illnesses associated with flea-control products were reported to the California Department of Pesticide Regulation, the Texas Department of Health, and the Washington State Department of Health, each of which maintains a surveillance system for identifying, investigating, and preventing pesticide-related illnesses and injuries. This report describes cases of occupational illnesses associated with flea-control products, summarizes surveillance data, and provides recommendations for handling these products safely. (+info)
Potential exposure to Australian bat lyssavirus, Queensland, 1996-1999.
(2/64)
Two human deaths caused by Australian bat lyssavirus (ABL) infection have been reported since 1996. Information was obtained from 205 persons (mostly adults from south Brisbane and the South Coast of Queensland), who reported potential ABL exposure to the Brisbane Southside Public Health Unit from November 1,1996, to January 31, 1999. Volunteer animal handlers accounted for 39% of potential exposures, their family members for 12%, professional animal handlers for 14%, community members who intentionally handled bats for 31%, and community members with contacts initiated by bats for 4%. The prevalence of Lyssavirus detected by fluorescent antibody test in 366 sick, injured, or orphaned bats from the area was 6%. Sequelae of exposure, including the requirement for expensive postexposure prophylaxis, may be reduced by educating bat handlers and the public of the risks involved in handling Australian bats. (+info)
Mechanism and epidemiology of laboratory animal allergy.
(3/64)
Laboratory animal allergy (LAA) is a form of occupational allergic disease. The development of laboratory animal allergy is due to the presence of IgE antibodies directed against animal proteins. The process of sensitization (development of IgE antibodies) is a complex process which involves interaction of antigen presenting cells and lymphocytes of the Th-2 cell type. These cells generate a host of cytokines and other factors which lead to immediate hypersensitivity reactions and other factors which lead to immediate hypersensitivity reactions and the generation of allergic inflammation. Typical symptoms of laboratory animal allergy include nasal symptoms, such as sneezing, watery discharge, and congestion. Skin rashes are also common. Asthma, which produces symptoms of cough, wheezing, and shortness of breath, may affect 20-38% of workers who are sensitized to laboratory animal allergens. Rarely a generalized, life-threatening allergic reaction (anaphylaxis) may occur. The estimated prevalence of laboratory animal allergy is variable depending on the method used for diagnosis, but nonetheless may affect up to 46% of exposed workers. The presence of pre-existing allergies to non-work place allergens (e.g., dust mite, pollens, molds), exposure to laboratory animal allergens, and possibly tobacco smoking are risk factors for the development of laboratory animal allergy. Progress in the understanding of the mechanism and epidemiology of laboratory animal allergy will lead to improved methods for its prevention. (+info)
Laboratory animal allergens.
(4/64)
Allergic sensitivity to laboratory animals can pose a significant occupational hazard to anyone with regular animal contact. Reactions to mice and rats are most common although all furred animals produce allergens that can lead to sensitization and disease. Most of the relevant allergens of laboratory animals have been defined and characterized, which has revealed that these allergens are typically small, acidic glycoproteins and that many of them are members of a superfamily of extracellular proteins called lipocalins. In addition to understanding their molecular characteristics, the identification of these allergens has also made it possible to measure their distribution in laboratory environments and to relate exposure levels to sensitization and symptoms. These studies have shown that the major laboratory animal allergens are carried on small particles that are both capable of remaining airborne for extended periods and penetrating into the lower airways of exposed workers. These advances in the understanding of these important occupational allergens will allow for the development of better methods of diagnosis and avoidance for affected workers and others who may be at risk for future difficulties. (+info)
Controlling exposure to laboratory animal allergens.
(5/64)
Laboratory animal allergy (LAA) is a significant occupational disease that may affect up to one third of personnel exposed to laboratory animals. Research has characterized the relative risks of exposure, in terms of intensity, frequency, and duration, associated with given tasks and work areas in the animal facility. Studies have shown that reduced exposure to animal allergens can reduce the incidence of LAA and relieve symptoms among affected workers. A combination of measures to eliminate or control allergen exposure, including engineering and administrative controls and personal protective equipment, have been integral components of effective LAA management programs. The author provides a comprehensive review of exposure control options, considerations, and " best practices" relative to laboratory animal allergen in the context of traditional industrial hygiene methods. (+info)
Laboratory animal allergy: a British perspective on a global problem.
(6/64)
In the United Kingdom, laboratory animal allergy (LAA) has been recognized as an important occupational disease for nearly 25 years. However, introduction of health and safety legislation (e.g., the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations of 1988) and an increasing knowledge of the factors that contribute to the etiology of this disease have had surprisingly little impact on the prevalence and incidence of LAA over the last 10 to 20 yr. Studies of the relation between exposure to animal allergens and the development of LAA reveal that the risk of disease increases with increasing intensity of exposure. Current evidence suggests that animal allergens are very potent, and substantial decreases in allergen exposure are therefore necessary before a reduction in symptoms will be observed. In the United Kingdom, it is unlikely that an Occupational Exposure Limit will be set for animal allergens in the near future, partly because an adequately standardized assay for quantifying exposure is not yet available. Prevention of LAA in the future will probably be driven by the needs of the industry and will most likely rely on the adoption of guidelines describing " best practise" which incorporate sophisticated engineering methods of controlling exposure to animal allergens. (+info)
Medical surveillance of allergy in laboratory animal handlers.
(7/64)
Allergic disease is a serious occupational health concern for individuals who have contact with laboratory animals. The principal respiratory symptoms include allergic rhinitis, conjunctivitis, and asthma. Urticaria (" hives") is the most common skin manifestation. The overall prevalence of allergic disease among laboratory animal handlers is about 23%, and respiratory allergy is much more common than skin allergy. Various studies have found annual incidence rates ranging from 2% to 12%. Prevention of animal allergy depends on control of allergenic material in the work environment. Personal protective equipment such as air filtering respirators should be used in addition to the other exposure control technologies where conditions require. Pre-placement evaluation and periodic medical surveillance of workers are important pieces of the overall occupational health program. The emphasis of these medical evaluations should be on counseling and early disease detection. The article gives recommendations for the content of the medical evaluations. (+info)
Exposure-response relations among laboratory animal workers exposed to rats.
(8/64)
AIM: To explore exposure-response relations in a cohort of laboratory animal workers. METHODS: Exposure-response modelling was carried out in a cohort of 342 laboratory animal workers. Three exposure indices, divided into different exposure categories, were used in the analyses: intensity of exposure to rat urinary aeroallergen (RUA, the main allergen workers were exposed to), weekly duration of exposure to rats, and the product of the intensity and weekly duration of exposure. Outcomes studied were work related chest, eyes and nose, and skin symptoms that had started after employment at the sites, specific sensitisation, and a combination of symptoms and sensitisation. Cox proportional hazard modelling was used to explore exposure-response relations. Smoking, atopic status, age, and gender were taken into account. RESULTS: We observed the clearest exposure-response relations for the intensity of exposure to RUA and the various endpoints. No clear exposure-response relations were observed for the weekly duration of exposure or the product of the intensity and weekly duration of exposure. The strongest and clearest exposure-response relations for symptoms were observed among rat sensitised workers, while the non-sensitised workers only showed small increased risks of developing symptoms without clear exposure-response relations. Sensitised workers were almost four times more likely to go on to develop chest symptoms compared to non-sensitised workers. (+info)