Epidemiological assessment of occupationally related, chemically induced sperm count suppression
01 Feb 1980-Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine (J Occup Med)-Vol. 22, Iss: 2, pp 77-82
TL;DR: Exposure to DBCP, but not to ECH, was positively associated with detectable sperm count suppression and it is suggested that the key to identifying and assessing occupationally related sperm count suppressed lies in the proper classification and interpretation of group sperm count data.
Abstract: Occupationally related, chemically induced sperm count suppression is a recently recognized problem, first brought to light in connection with the manufacture and formulation of dibromochloropropane (DBCP). The authors studied sperm count data from four occupational cohorts - two exposed to DBCP and two exposed to epichlorohydrin (ECH). In both DBCP cohorts there was a significant difference (alpha = 0.05) between sperm count distribution functions of the exposed group and of the non-exposed group. A much higher percentage of exposed men was oligospermic and the median sperm count for each exposed group was substantially lower than that for the respective non-exposed group. In the ECH cohorts there was no significant difference between sperm count data for the exposed group and for the non-exposed group. The authors concluded that exposure to DBCP, but not to ECH, was positively associated with detectable sperm count suppression. It is suggested that the key to identifying and assessing occupationally related sperm count suppression lies in the proper classification and interpretation of group sperm count data.
Citations
More filters
••
TL;DR: Female reproductive capability assessed by the endpoint, oocyte fertilizability, was reduced by exposure to trichloroethylene and inhaled tetrachloro methylene, and oocytes from exposed females had a reduced ability to bind sperm plasma membrane proteins.
37 citations
••
36 citations
••
34 citations
••
TL;DR: On September 21-23, 1981, a workshop was held in Rockville, MD, to discuss specific issues related to the evaluation of data for risk assessment in reproductive toxicology (including teratology).
Abstract: On September 21-23, 1981, a workshop was held in Rockville, MD, to discuss specific issues related to the evaluation of data for risk assessment in reproductive toxicology (including teratology). The workshop was sponsored by the Interagency Regulatory Liaison Group (IRLG) and was organized by the IRLG Reproductive Toxicity Risk Assessment Task Group.t The Task Group's original charge was to develop criteria to support the consistent interpretation and use of reproductive and teratology data in the assessment of human risk by federal regulatory agencies. Early in the deliberations of the Task Group, it became obvious that a number of issues important to risk assessment were not well addressed in the literature. From these deliberations and from comments in response to a notice of the Task Group's work plan in the Federal Register (1), the workshop was convened to address specific issues that could influence the overall basis for policy-setting in reproductive toxicity risk assessment.
33 citations
••
TL;DR: Four alternative approaches for deriving regulatory levels for reproductive toxicants by applying them to the available data on the human spermatotoxicant 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane are compared.
Abstract: This paper compares four alternative approaches for deriving regulatory levels for reproductive toxicants by applying them to the available data on the human spermatotoxicant 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP). The alternatives examined include the Proposition 65 approach (application of a mandatory 1000-fold uncertainty factor to a no-observed-adverse-effect level [NOAEL]), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approach (application of flexible uncertainty factors to a NOAEL), the Benchmark Dose approach (application of flexible uncertainty factors to a dose associated with a known level of change in a reproductive parameter), and the Quantitative Risk Estimation approach (using low-dose linear extrapolation and a model of the relationship between sperm count and infertility). Applied to DBCP, these approaches do not produce substantially different estimates of allowable exposure levels. However, the approaches do have different data requirements and provide different amounts of information on reproductive hazards to risk managers and the public. Neither the Proposition 65 nor the EPA approach provides information about the extent of health risk remaining at a regulatory level. In contrast, the Benchmark Dose approach can provide estimates of the magnitude of sperm count reduction at a regulatory level, and the Quantitative Risk Estimation approach can provide estimates of exposure-induced infertility.
31 citations
Related Papers (5)
Trending Questions (2)
Can a regular doctor check sperm count?
It is suggested that the key to identifying and assessing occupationally related sperm count suppression lies in the proper classification and interpretation of group sperm count data.
Does Test E increase sperm count?
The authors concluded that exposure to DBCP, but not to ECH, was positively associated with detectable sperm count suppression.