Re: formaldehyde danger

Thank you, Phillipe, this is interesting. I wonder if they included correlations with smoking as well...doesn't say so.
It seems that the kind of concentrations we're dealing with are piffling, although I always use a fume cabinet anyway just to minimize effects. I believe formaldehyde is quite bad for asthmatics btw.

Kate

----- Original Message -----
  From: Monnoyer Philippe
  To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
  Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2004 2:56 AM
  Subject: formaldehyde danger

  Hello All,

  Since everybody seems to be concerned with formaldehyde, I wanted to hunt for scientific study on that. I just wanted to share this abstract with you. I didn't read the full paper myself.

  Philippe

  Extended follow-up of a cohort of British chemical workers exposed to formaldehyde
  Coggon D, Harris EC, Poole J, Palmer KT
  JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE
  95 (21): 1608-1615 NOV 5 2003

        Document type: Article Language: English Cited References: 24 Times Cited: 1 Explanation

  Abstract:
  Background: Formaldehyde is mutagenic and, when inhaled at high concentrations, carcinogenic in rats. Some epidemiologic studies have linked occupational exposure to formaldehyde with cancers of the nose, nasopharynx, and lung, but the evidence for human carcinogenicity has been inconsistent and requires clarification. Methods: We extended by 11 years the follow-up of an existing cohort of 14 014 men employed after 1937 at six British factories where formaldehyde was produced or used. Subjects had been identified from employment records, and their jobs had been classified for potential exposure to formaldehyde. Standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) were derived using the person-years method and were compared with the expected numbers of deaths for the national population. Results: During follow-up through December 31, 2000, 5185 deaths were recorded, including two from sino-nasal cancer (2.3 expected) and one from nasopharyngeal cancer (2.0 expected). Relative to the national population, mortality from lung cancer was increased among those who worked with formaldehyde, particularly in men in the highest of four estimated exposure categories (>2 ppm) (SMR = 1.58, 95% confidence interval = 1.40 to 1.78), and the increase persisted after adjustment for local geographic variations in mortality (SMR = 1.28, 95% confidence interval = 1.13 to 1.44). However, there was a statistically nonsignificant decrease in the risk of death from lung cancer with duration of high exposure (P-trend =.18), and this risk showed no trend with time since first high exposure (P-trend =.99). Conclusions: The evidence for human carcinogenicity of formaldehyde remains unconvincing. Although a small effect on sino-nasal or nasopharyngeal cancer cannot be ruled out, a possible increase in the risk of lung cancer is a greater concern.

  KeyWords Plus:
  LUNG-CANCER, NASOPHARYNGEAL CARCINOMA, EPIDEMIOLOGIC EVIDENCE, NASAL CAVITY, MORTALITY, INDUSTRY, METAANALYSIS, EXPOSURES, PHARYNX, SINUS

  Addresses:
  Coggon D, Southampton Gen Hosp, MRC, Environm Epidemiol Unit, Southampton SO16 6YD, Hants, England
  Univ Southampton, MRC, Environm Epidemiol Unit, Southampton, Hants, England

  Publisher:
  OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC, JOURNALS DEPT, 2001 EVANS RD, CARY, NC 27513 USA

  IDS Number:
  739DW

  ISSN:
  0027-8874
Received on Wed Feb 18 17:18:34 2004