European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Health and Consumer Protection, Chemical Assessment and Testing Unit, Via Fermi 1, 21027, Ispra (VA), Italy.
Environ Int. 2011 May;37(4):743-65. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2011.01.005. Epub 2011 Feb 26.
This paper summarizes recent data on the occurrence of major organic compounds (benzene, toluene, xylenes, styrene, acetaldehyde, formaldehyde, naphthalene, limonene, α-pinene and ammonia, classified by the European Commission's INDEX strategy report as the priority pollutants to be regulated) and evaluates accordingly cancer and non-cancer risks posed by indoor exposure in dwellings and public buildings in European Union (EU) countries. The review process indicated that significant differences in indoor air quality exist within and among the countries where data were available, indicating corresponding differences in sources and emission strength of airborne chemicals, identified or not. Conservative exposure limits were not exceeded for non-carcinogenic effects, except for formaldehyde; for carcinogenic agents the estimated risks were up to three orders of magnitude higher than the one (10(-6)) proposed as acceptable by risk management bodies. However, the risk assessment evaluation process faces crucial difficulties, either due to the relative paucity of indoor air quality measurements in many EU countries, or by the lack of sampling consistency in the already existing studies, indicating the need for additional measurements of indoor air quality following a harmonized sampling and analytical protocol. Additionally, uncertainties embodied in the cancer potency factors and exposure limit values impose further difficulties in substance prioritization and risk management.
本文总结了近期有关主要有机化合物(苯、甲苯、二甲苯、苯乙烯、乙醛、甲醛、萘、柠檬烯、α-蒎烯和氨,根据欧洲委员会的 INDEX 战略报告被归类为优先监管的污染物)在欧盟国家居民住宅和公共建筑室内暴露的发生情况,并据此评估了癌症和非癌症风险。审查过程表明,在有数据的国家中,室内空气质量存在显著差异,表明空气中化学物质的来源和排放强度存在相应差异,无论是否已被识别。除甲醛外,非致癌效应的保守暴露限值未被超过;对于致癌剂,估计的风险比风险管理机构提出的可接受风险(10(-6))高出三个数量级。然而,风险评估评价过程面临着重大困难,要么是因为许多欧盟国家的室内空气质量测量相对较少,要么是因为已经存在的研究中采样一致性缺乏,表明需要按照协调一致的采样和分析方案进一步测量室内空气质量。此外,致癌效力因素和暴露限值中包含的不确定性进一步增加了物质优先级排序和风险管理的难度。