Rappaport S M
Am J Ind Med. 1984;6(4):291-303. doi: 10.1002/ajim.4700060407.
Although OSHA promulgates standards for chemical exposures on the basis of workers' relative risk of acquiring chronic disease, it interprets the limits as absolute levels never to be exceeded. This poses a dilemma to the gathering of useful information which can be used to assess and reduce exposures, because employers can maximize compliance outcomes by minimizing exposure monitoring. The result is that, in the absence of adequate information, the working population's true risk of acquiring disease is essentially unknown and average exposures of several times the permissible exposure limit (PEL) can be declared in compliance. The dilemma could be resolved if OSHA would define compliance in terms of one or more parameters of the cumulative exposure distribution. Since OSHA's current method of assessing risks is based upon average exposures, enforcement of the PEL as the limit of each worker's true mean exposure would be internally consistent. This change could have the effect of encouraging employers to monitor exposures since the confidence interval surrounding the mean can be narrowed with increased sample size.
尽管职业安全与健康管理局(OSHA)根据工人患慢性病的相对风险来颁布化学物质接触标准,但它将这些限值解释为绝对水平,绝不能超过。这给收集可用于评估和减少接触的有用信息带来了两难困境,因为雇主可以通过尽量减少接触监测来使合规结果最大化。结果是,在缺乏足够信息的情况下,劳动人口患疾病的真实风险基本上是未知的,而且可以宣称平均接触量是允许接触限值(PEL)的几倍也符合规定。如果OSHA能根据累积接触分布的一个或多个参数来定义合规,这个两难困境就能得到解决。由于OSHA目前评估风险的方法是基于平均接触量,将PEL作为每个工人真实平均接触量的限值来执行在内部将是一致的。这种改变可能会促使雇主监测接触情况,因为随着样本量的增加,围绕均值的置信区间可以变窄。