Schweinsberg F
Abteilung für Allgemeine Hygiene und Umwelthygiene Universität Tübingen.
Zentralbl Hyg Umweltmed. 1990 May;190(1-2):207-16.
Proper interpretation of threshold limit values should always take into account that such limits are not absolute, but rather subject to change depending on advances in scientific knowledge. Threshold limit values derived from toxicologic study are best suited to evaluation of health risks of chemicals in the environment. Although more toxicologic information than is currently available would be desirable for the establishment of limit values, this should not prevent agreement on limits for more substances. "Better" threshold limit values would be forthcoming from epidemiologic studies, which are particularly rare in the FRG. Prospective studies measure current exposure; but appearance of detrimental health effects generally requires a lengthy latency period (e.g., decades in the case of cancer or cardiovascular disease). Threshold limit values permit monitoring and, if necessary, restriction of anthropogenic activity. Such restrictions are necessary, as shown by severe health damage which has occurred in the past (e.g., angiosarcoma due to vinyl chloride or neurogenic damage due to mercury in the workplace, tumors due to arsenic in drinking water, and methemoglobinemia in infants due to nitrite or renal damage due to cadmium in food). Evaluation of potential detrimental health effects for threshold limit values in environmental media is difficult because the effective dose cannot be determined. Monitoring of such limit values, which have already been incorporated into West German law, is relatively easy to implement, however (e.g. continuous outdoor air quality sampling and measurement, and periodic analysis of drinking water and foodstuffs). Since such monitoring may be performed close to the source, preventive measures should be easy to implement. Biological threshold limit values (biological monitoring) are essential to effective evaluation of the health effects of chemicals. Such limits should be established for more substances. When biological limit values are exceeded, however, it is generally difficult to determine the source(s) of exposure. Since individuals themselves cause the most damage to their own health e.g., through consumption of alcoholic beverages, cigarette smoking, or poor eating habits; the establishment of threshold limit values designed to protect individuals from themselves would be the most effective method of preventing environmental disease.
对阈限值的正确解读应始终考虑到，这些限值并非绝对的，而是会随着科学知识的进步而变化。从毒理学研究得出的阈限值最适合评估环境中化学物质的健康风险。尽管为确定限值需要比目前更多的毒理学信息，但这不应妨碍就更多物质的限值达成一致。“更好的”阈限值将来自流行病学研究，而这类研究在联邦德国尤为罕见。前瞻性研究测量当前的接触情况；但有害健康影响的出现通常需要很长的潜伏期（例如，癌症或心血管疾病的潜伏期为几十年）。阈限值允许对人为活动进行监测，并在必要时加以限制。过去发生的严重健康损害表明了这种限制的必要性（例如，工作场所因氯乙烯导致的血管肉瘤或因汞导致的神经源性损害、饮用水中砷导致的肿瘤、婴儿因亚硝酸盐导致的高铁血红蛋白血症或食物中镉导致的肾脏损害）。由于无法确定有效剂量，所以评估环境介质中阈限值对健康的潜在有害影响很困难。然而，对已纳入西德法律的这类限值进行监测相对容易实施（例如，连续进行室外空气质量采样和测量，以及定期分析饮用水和食品）。由于这种监测可以在源头附近进行，所以预防措施应该易于实施。生物阈限值（生物监测）对于有效评估化学物质对健康的影响至关重要。应该为更多物质确定这类限值。然而，当超过生物限值时，通常很难确定接触源。由于个人自身对自己的健康造成的损害最大，例如通过饮用酒精饮料、吸烟或不良饮食习惯；制定旨在保护个人免受自身伤害的阈限值将是预防环境疾病的最有效方法。
