4.7 Article

Carcinogenic potencies of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons for back-door neighbors of restaurants with cooking emissions

Journal

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
Volume 417, Issue -, Pages 68-75

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2011.12.012

Keywords

PAHs; B[a]P; Restaurant; Neighbor; Exposure; Risk assessment

Funding

  1. National Research Program in Genomic Medicine on Lung Cancer [DOH94-TD-G-111-028]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In the present study, 21 polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) congeners were measured in the exhaust stack of 3 types of restaurants: 9 Chinese, 7 Western, and 4 barbeque (BBQ The total PAH concentration of BBQ restaurants (58.81 +/- 23.89 mu g m(-3)) was significantly higher than that of Chinese (20.99 +/- 13.67 mu g m(-3)) and Westem (21.47 +/- 11.44 mu g m(-3)) restaurants. The total benzo[a]pyrene potency equivalent (B[a]P-eq) concentrations, however, were highest in Chinese restaurants (1.82 +/- 224 mu g m(-3)), followed by Western (0.86 +/- 1.43 mu g m(-3), p<0.01) and BBQ-type restaurants (0.59 +/- 0.55 mu g m(-3), p<0.01). We further developed a probabilistic risk model to assess the incremental lifetime cancer risk (ILCR) for people exposed to carcinogenic PAHs. Because the exhaust stack directly affected the back-door neighbors of these restaurants, we were concerned with the real exposure of groups near the exhaust stack outlets of these restaurants. The ILCRs for total exposure of the neighbors (inhalation + dermal contact + ingestion) were 2.6-31.3, 1.5-14.8, and 13-12.2 x 10(-6) in Chinese, Westem, and BBQ restaurants, respectively. We suggest that the maximum acceptable exposure time to the exhaust stack outlet area for Chinese, Western, and BBQ restaurants ranges between 5-19, 17-42, and 18-56 h month(-1), respectively, based on an ILCR of less than 10(-6). Crown Copyright (C) 2011 Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available