کد مقاله | کد نشریه | سال انتشار | مقاله انگلیسی | نسخه تمام متن |
---|---|---|---|---|
5856532 | 1131977 | 2015 | 7 صفحه PDF | دانلود رایگان |
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) issues National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for six criteria pollutants, including ozone. Each standard has four elements: an indicator, level, averaging time, and form. Ozone levels (i.e., air concentrations) alone in scientific studies are not directly comparable to the “level” element of the NAAQS because the standard considers the level in the context of its relation to the remaining elements. Failure to appreciate this has led to misunderstandings regarding NAAQS that would be health-protective. This can be seen with controlled human ozone exposure studies, which often involved small numbers of people exercising quasi-continuously for a long duration at an intensity not common in the general population (and unlikely achievable by most sensitive individuals), under worst-case exposure profiles. In addition, epidemiology studies have used different averaging times and have had methodological limitations that may have biased results. Such considerations can make it difficult to compare ozone levels and results across studies and to appropriately apply them in a NAAQS evaluation. Relating patterns and circumstances of exposure, and exposure measurements, to all elements of the NAAQS can be challenging, but if US EPA fully undertook this, it would be evident that available evidence does not indicate that proposed lower ozone standards would be more health protective than the current one.
Journal: Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology - Volume 72, Issue 1, June 2015, Pages 134-140