4.1 Article

Consumption of Seafood, Serum Liver Enzymes, and Blood Levels of PFOS and PFOA in the Japanese Population

期刊

JOURNAL OF OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
卷 55, 期 3, 页码 184-194

出版社

JAPAN SOC OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
DOI: 10.1539/joh.12-0264-OA

关键词

Blood; Fish intake; Perfluorooctanesulfonate (PFOS); Perfluorooctanoate (PFOA); Serum liver enzymes

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Perfluorooctanesulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoate (PFOA) have been shown to accumulate in the human body. The purpose of the present study was to examine the factors associated with the blood levels of PFOS and PFOA. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed on 307 men and 301 women (aged 16-76 years) living in 15 prefectures in Japan. Blood levels of PFOS and PFOA were measured by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. Hepatic enzymes (gamma-GTP, GOT, and GPT) and omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (DHA and EPA) levels in serum were also measured. Associations between the levels of PFOS and PFOA in blood and the intake frequency of 41 kinds of dishes, foods and beverages and the serum levels of liver enzymes and omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids were examined using rank correlations. Results: Frequency of intake of boiled fish in broth, sliced raw fish and coastal fish showed significant positive correlations with PFOS concentrations in blood after adjustments for potential confounders. Serum levels of GOT, GPT, DHA and EPA showed significant positive correlations with PFOS and PFOA in blood. There was also a significant regional difference in the blood levels of PFOS and PFOA, with medians being highest in the Tokai/Hokuriku/Kinki region. Conclusions: These findings suggest that the concentrations of PFOS in blood were mainly associated with fish consumption and that the levels of PFOS and PFOA were associated with the serum levels of liver enzymes in Japanese populations. Further investigations are required to clarify the reason for the regional differences in blood levels of PFOS and PFOA in Japan.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据