Univ Rennes, Inserm, EHESP, Irset (Institut de recherche en santé, environnement et travail) - UMR_S 1085, Pointe-à-Pitre, France.
Centre Armand-Frappier Santé Biotechnologie, Institut national de la recherche scientifique, Université du Québec, Laval, Québec, Canada; School of Public Health, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Environ Res. 2024 Dec 15;263(Pt 3):120238. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2024.120238. Epub 2024 Oct 24.
Limited data document the spectrum of exposures in the agricultural environment. We describe here the wide range of chemical and physical agents, and organizational factors, encountered in agricultural jobs held in the past in Canada and abroad.
We used data from a population-based case-control study of prostate cancer including 3,925 male participants residing in Montreal, Canada in 2005-2012. Lifetime occupational histories and detailed job descriptions were collected in-person. Industrial hygienists and an agronomist conducted semi-quantitative evaluations of exposure, including intensity and reliability, to some 300 chemical and physical agents in each job held. Analyses focused on the 156 agricultural jobs ever held in the study population. Clusters of agricultural co-exposures were derived.
Agricultural jobs had taken place in 1946-2012, 53% ending in 1970 or after. Jobs were often (43%) held in Quebec, Canada; 22% in Italy, Portugal or Greece, and 10% in Haiti. Jobs entailed exposure to an average of 10 chemical agents (±7) and most were characterized by long working hours, high physical activity levels, and did not provoke stress or anxiety. Few involved early morning shifts. Exposure to 78 agents was assigned with probable or definite certainty. The most common definite or probable carcinogens were ultraviolet radiation (92% of jobs), environmental tobacco smoke (39%), diesel engine exhaust (23%), wood dust (20%), lubricating oils and greases (20%) and lead (15%). Pesticide exposure (as a group) occurred in 31% of jobs. Fifty-four percent of jobs entailed exposure to ≥2 recognized carcinogens. Exposure clusters varied according to countries and type of agricultural activities (general, animal, crops, horticulture, vineyards, etc.).
Findings highlight the heterogeneity of exposure patterns in past agricultural environments based on their setting and activities involved. Studies on health-related effects of farming should account for numerous potential exposures, beyond their typical focus on pesticides.
有限的数据记录了农业环境中的暴露范围。我们在这里描述了在加拿大和国外过去从事农业工作时遇到的广泛的化学和物理因素以及组织因素。
我们使用了一项基于人群的前列腺癌病例对照研究的数据，该研究包括 2005 年至 2012 年期间居住在加拿大蒙特利尔的 3925 名男性参与者。通过个人访谈收集了他们的职业史和详细的工作描述。工业卫生学家和农学家对大约 300 种化学和物理因素进行了半定量评估，这些因素涉及到他们过去从事过的每一份工作。分析集中在研究人群中曾从事过的 156 种农业工作。得出了农业工作的接触暴露群。
农业工作发生在 1946 年至 2012 年期间，53%的工作在 1970 年或之后结束。工作地点通常在加拿大魁北克省（43%）；22%在意大利、葡萄牙或希腊，10%在海地。工作平均涉及 10 种化学物质（±7），大多数工作的特点是工作时间长、体力活动水平高，不会引起压力或焦虑。很少有工作涉及清晨轮班。78 种物质的暴露被评估为可能或肯定确定。最常见的明确或可能致癌物质是紫外线辐射（92%的工作）、环境烟草烟雾（39%）、柴油发动机尾气（23%）、木尘（20%）、润滑油和油脂（20%）以及铅（15%）。在 31%的工作中接触到了农药。54%的工作接触到了≥2 种公认的致癌物质。根据国家和农业活动类型（一般、动物、作物、园艺、葡萄园等），暴露群也不同。
研究结果突出了基于农业环境的设置和涉及的活动，过去农业环境中暴露模式的异质性。与农业相关的健康影响研究应考虑到许多潜在的暴露，而不仅仅是他们通常关注的农药。
