Blejer H P, Wagner W
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1976;271:179-86. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1976.tb23107.x.
In 1820 the first malignancies ascribed as due to occupational arsenic exposure were reported as scrotal cancers among smelters. A century later the causal relationship between chronic occupational, environmental or medical arsenical exposure and skin carcinogenesis was firmly established. From 1948 to 1975, nine out of eleven epidemiological studies have shown, initially or upon review, significant excess mortality from respiratory cancer among diverse occupations exposed to various inorganic arsenicals. Two of the nine studies have shown concommitant, significant excess mortality from lymphatic cancer, and another, from skin cancer. Additionally, two such studies have revealed a dose-response relationship between arsenical exposure and lung carcinogenesis. In the first, reported in 1969, the relationship was semi-quantitative, with a possible interactive role by sulfur dioxide or other contaminants. The other demonstrated a dose-response which was quantitative for arsenic per se. Upon our reinterpretation, this dose-response also demonstrated an increased lung cancer mortality risk apparently at arsenic concentrations above 1 mug/M3, calculated as the 8-hour TWA daily exposure over a 40-year working life. However, these and related data do not reveal a definite no-effect exposure level. Thus, in the absence of data documenting a cancerigenically safe level of occupational exposure and because of the environmental ubiquity of arsenic, the conclusion is drawn that the arsenic body burden of workers should not be occupationally increased above that produced by the ambient level.
1820年,有报告称冶炼工人中出现了首例被认为是职业性砷暴露所致的恶性肿瘤——阴囊癌。一个世纪后,慢性职业性、环境性或医源性砷暴露与皮肤致癌之间的因果关系得以确立。1948年至1975年期间,11项流行病学研究中有9项在最初或复查时表明,接触各种无机砷的不同职业人群中,肺癌死亡率显著过高。这9项研究中有2项显示同时出现淋巴癌死亡率显著过高,另有1项显示皮肤癌死亡率过高。此外,其中2项研究揭示了砷暴露与肺癌发生之间的剂量反应关系。第一项研究于1969年报告,这种关系是半定量的,二氧化硫或其他污染物可能起到交互作用。另一项研究表明剂量反应关系对砷本身而言是定量的。经我们重新解读,这种剂量反应关系还表明,按照40年工作寿命期间8小时时间加权平均日接触量计算,在砷浓度高于1微克/立方米时,肺癌死亡风险明显增加。然而,这些以及相关数据并未揭示出明确的无效应暴露水平。因此,由于缺乏记录职业暴露致癌安全水平的数据,且鉴于砷在环境中普遍存在,得出的结论是,工人的砷体内负荷不应因职业原因而高于环境水平所产生的负荷。