Document 0QeRDJGEBEXEny7qb2obM91R

3M Company Page 1 of 121 FINAL REPORT Epidemiology, 220-3W-05 Medical Department 3M Company St. Paul. MN 55144 Date: October 11, 2001* Title: A Cross-sectional Analysis of Serum Perfluorooctanesulfonate (PFOS) and Perfluorooctanoate (PFOA) in Relation to Clinical Chemistry, Thyroid Hormone, Hematology and Urinalysis Results from Male and Female Employee Participants of the 2000 Antwerp and Decatur Fluorochemical Medical Surveillance Program Study Start Date: March 1,2000 Protocol Number (not applicable) IRB Approval Exempt Expedited X ERB Approval Date: (not applicable as these data are from a medical surveillance program) Principal Investigator Co-investigators: Study Director: Geary W. Olsen, D.V.M., Ph.D.' Michele M. Burlew, M.S.* Jean M. Burris, R.N., M.P.H.' Jeffrey H. Mandel, M D ., M.P.H.* Jeffrey H. Mandel, M.D., M.P.H.' 1. 3M Medical Department, 220-3W-05, St. Paul, MN 55144-1000 '(Corrections made from previous version) ABSTRACT 3M Company Page 2 o f 121 The 3M fluorochemical medical surveillance program is conducted on a routine periodic basis at the company's Antwerp (Belgium) and Decatur (Alabama) fluorochemical manufacturing plants. In the most recent occurrence in 2000, there were 255 Antwerp employees (206 male and 49 female) and 263 Decatur employees (215 male, 48 female) who participated in the program. This represents approximately 75 percent and 50 percent of the eligible employees at these two locations, respectively. Seventy three percent of the participating Antwerp male employees and 75 percent of the Decatur employees were engaged in production activities. Only 12 percent of the participating Antwerp female employees were engaged in production activities compared to 63 percent of the Decatur female employees. Employees' sera were quantitatively analyzed for PFOS (perfluorooctanesulfonate), PFOA (perfluorooctanoate), PFHS (perfluorohexanesulfonate), PFOSAA (N-ethyl perfluorooctanesulfonamidoacetate), M570 (N-methyl perfluorooctanesulfonamidoacetate), PFOSA (perfluorooctanesulfonateamide) and M556 (perfluorooctanesulfonamidoacetate) using high-pressure liquid chromatography/electrospray tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC/ESMSMS) and evaluated versus an extracted curve from a human serum matrix. A total organic fluorine index (TOF) was also determined by calculating the percent of each specific fluorochemical's molecular weight that was attributed to organic fluorine and multiplied by the ppm measured for each fluorochemical and then summed across all seven fluorochemicals. 3M Company Page 3 o f 121 Mean serum PFOS levels for Antwerp production and non-production male workers were 1.16 and 0.42 ppm, respectively. Among Decatur production and non- production male workers, their mean serum PFOS levels were 1.63 and 0.73 ppm, respectively. Mean serum PFOA levels for Antwerp male production and non-production workers were 1.28 and 0.34 ppm, respectively. Among Decatur male production and non-production workers, their mean serum PFOA levels were 2.34 and 0.59 ppm, respectively. The mean PFOS and PFOA levels for the Antwerp female employees (primarily nonproduction) were 0.13 ppm and 0.07 ppm, respectively. The mean PFOS and PFOA levels for Decatur female production and nonproduction employees were 0.93 and 1.23 ppm, respectively. Separate reports have been written which analyzed the employees' serum levels in relation to their job and building location work assignments as obtained from a self-reported work history questionnaire. A standard set of hematological and clinical chemistry tests were analyzed. These included the following hematological tests: hematocrit (percent), hemoglobin (gm/dl), red blood cells (RBC, 1000/mm3), white blood cells (WBC, 1000/ mm3) and platelet count (1000/ mm3); and the following clinical chemistry tests: alkaline phosphatase (IU/L), gamma glutamyl transferase (GGT, IU/L), aspartate aminotransferase (AST, IU/L), alanine aminotransferase (ALT, IU/L), total and direct bilirubin (mg/dl), blood urea nitrogen (BUN, mg/dl), serum creatinine (mg/dl), blood glucose (mg/dl), cholesterol (mg/dl). high density cholesterol (HDL, mg/dl) and triglycerides (mg/dl). Urinalyses were only assessed for Decatur employees via the standard urine microstick analysis, which tested for urine glucose, albumin and red blood cells. Six thyroid hormones were also assayed: thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH; /iIU/ml); serum thyroxine (T4; /ig/dL); 3M Company Page 4 of 121 free thyroxine (free T4; ng/dL); serurn triiodothyronine (T3; pg/mL); thyroid hormone binding ratio (THBR, %, previously referred to as T3 Uptake) and free thyroxine index (FTQ. Statistical analyses were conducted on the entire surveillance population as well as subgroups by gender, production worker (yes/no) and location. Univariate analyses categorized mean levels by serum PFOS quartile distributions. Multivariable regression was used to analyze the clinical chemistry and thyroid hormones as dependent variables in relation to the independent effects of PFOS, PFOA or TOF adjusted for several demographic variables (age, body mass index, number of alcoholic drinks per day, cigarettes smoked per day and years worked). There was a modest positive association between PFOS or PFO A with cholesterol as well as a stronger positive association between PFOA and triglycerides. These associations are inconsistent with the known toxicological evidence that has shown the hypolipidemic (not hyperlipidemic) effect of PFOS (in rats and primates) and PFOA (in rats but no effect in primates) at dosages that produced serum PFOS or PFOA levels higher than those measured in this population. Therefore, it is unlikely the observed positive associations between PFOS or PFOA and lipids are causal. Because of the potential confounding positive association with serum triglycerides, this variable was added to the hepatic clinical chemistry models as an independent variable. In these models, no significant.associations were observed with PFOS, PFOA or TOF in relation to alkaline phosphatase, GGT, AST, ALT or total bilirubin. Although T3 was positively associated with PFOA, no other thyroid hormones were associated with PFOS, PFOA or TOF: thus there is unlikely a causal explanation (e.g., hypothyroidism or 3M Company Page 5 of 121 hyperthyroidism) for this positive T3 association with PFOA. Hematological and urinalysis results were unremarkable. In summary, the findings from the 2000 fluorochemical medical surveillance program continue to suggest that Antwerp and Decatur fluorochemical production and non-production employees do not have significant changes in serum cholesterol, lipoproteins or hepatic enzymes that are consistent with toxicological findings in laboratory animals. Limitations of the study include its cross-sectional design, the voluntary participation rates and the lower levels of serum PFOS and PFOA measured among these employees compared with those suspected to cause effects in laboratory animals. A longitudinal analysis is reported separately for the fluorochemical medical surveillance Antwerp and Decatur program data from 1994 through 2000. INTRODUCTION 3M Company Page 6 of 121 The 3M fluorochemical medical surveillance program is conducted on a routine periodic basis at the company's Antwerp (Belgium) and Decatur (Alabama) fluorochemical manufacturing plants. Prior to 1994, total organic fluorine was measured rather than any specific fluorochemical analyte. Serum perfluorooctanesulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoate (PFOA) have been routinely assayed since 1994/95 rather than total organic fluorine. An analysis of the 1994/95 and 1997 medical surveillance program data in relation to Antwerp and Decatur employees' serum PFOS levels have been reported elsewhere (Olsen et al, 1998a, 1999a). In the 1994/1995 medical surveillance program, a total of 178 employees participated (Antwerp = 88; Decatur = 90) and 149 employees participated in 1997 (Antwerp = 65; Decatur = 84). A total of 61 Antwerp and Decatur employees participated in both years. The Antwerp male employee population was significantly younger than that at Decatur, had lower Body Mass Indices (BMI) and had higher self-reported daily consumption of alcohol. In addition, the employees'clinical chemistry profiles were different for several tests. The Antwerp employee population had lower mean alkaline phosphatase and triglyceride values and higher total bilirubin and HDL values than the Decatur employee population. The findings from this prior epidemiologic analysis suggested that significant clinical chemistry and hematological abnormalities were not associated with serum perfluorooctanesulfonate (PFOS) levels up to 6 parts per million (Olsen et al 1998a; 1999a). Nor were there consistent associations reported between serum PFOS and several hormone tests including testosterone, estradiol and thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH). It was not possible to derive inferences from the few employees who had serum 3M Company Page 7 of 121 PFOS levels > 6 ppm. An important limitation of this prior analysis was the low voluntary participation of male employees (less than 50%) and insufficient sample size of female employees which prevented a separate analysis. Also, although serum perfluorooctanoate (PFOA) was measured, it was not included in the analyses. Because the voluntary nature of the medical surveillance program may not provide for a complete understanding of the distribution of serum fluorochemical levels in the Decatur workforce, a random sample of 232 employees was selected for fluorochemical testing in the Fall, 1998. The distributions of employee serum PFOS and PFOA levels were comparable to the results reported in the voluntary Decatur medical surveillance program (Olsen et al 1999b). This finding suggested that the distribution of serum fluorochemical levels observed in the prior voluntary medical surveillance program likely reflected the distribution of serum PFOS and PFOA levels of all employees in the chemical plant. . Detailed discussions of the toxicology and epidemiology of PFOS and PFOA have been reported elsewhere (3M Company 2000; Alexander 2001a; 2001b; Butenhoff et al 2001; Gilliland and Mandel 1993;1996; Haughom and Spydevold 1992; Olsen et al 1998a; 1998b; 1999a; 2000; Pastoor et al 1987; Seacat et al 2001a; 2001b; Sohlenius et al 1993). For the purpose of brevity, this information will not be summarized in this Introduction. Suffice it to mention that for the purpose of employee medical surveillance, PFOS has been reported to be an inducer of peroxisome proliferation and hypolipidemia in rodents (Pastoor et al 1987; Ikeda et al 1987; Haughom and Spydevold 1992; Seacat et al 2001a; Sohlenius et al 1993 ) and primates (Seacat et al 2001b). PFOA has been inconsistently reported to produce hypolipidemia in rodents (Pastoor et al 1987; 3M Company Page 8 of 121 Haughom and Spydevold 1992;) and not in primates (Butenhoff et al 2001). The mechanism of action pertaining to this hypolipidemia remains to be fully elucidated. The purpose of this report was to conduct a cross-sectional analysis of the 2000 fluorochemical medical surveillance program for Antwerp and Decatur male and female employees. Unlike the earlier report for Antwerp and Decatur employees which only analyzed for PFOS (Olsen et al 1998a; 1999a), the present study examined associations for both PFOS and/or PFOA as well as a calculated measure for total organic fluorine (TOF). Longitudinal analyses of employees who participated from 1994/95 through 2000 were not analyzed as this was a focus of a separate analytical report (Olsen et al 2001a). METHODS The fluorochemical medical surveillance program is available, on a voluntary basis, to all Antwerp and Decatur chemical plant employees and those site employees who may work in the chemical plant area. In 2000, approximately 340 Antwerp and 500 Decatur chemical plant and site employees were eligible to participate. In addition to the fluorochemical testing program, a standard battery of clinical chemistry, pulmonary function and urinalysis (Decatur only) tests were performed on employees. In addition, several thyroid hormones were measured. A site-specific work history was also administered to all employee participants. Analyses of these self-reported workplace questionnaire data in conjunction with the employees' serum fluorochemical levels have been reported elsewhere for Antwerp (Olsen et al 2001b) and Decatur (Olsen et al, 2001c). 3M Company Page 9 of 121 Hematology. Clinical Chemistry and Urinalysis Allina Laboratory Services (St. Paul, Minnesota) performed the standard hematological and clinical chemistry tests. These included the following hematological tests: hematocrit (percent), hemoglobin (gm/dl), red blood cells (RBC, 1000/mm3), white blood cells (WBC, 1000/ mm3) and platelet count (1000/ mm3); and the following clinical chemistry tests: alkaline phosphatase (IU/L), gamma glutamyl transferase (GGT, IU/L), aspartate aminotransferase (AST, IU/L), alanine aminotransferase (ALT, IU/L), total and direct bilirubin (mg/dl), blood urea nitrogen (BUN, mg/dl), serum creatinine (mg/dl), blood glucose (mg/dl), cholesterol (mg/dl), high density cholesterol (HDL, mg/dl) and triglycerides (mg/dl). Urinalyses were only assessed for Decatur employees via the standard urine microstick analysis which tested for urine glucose, albumin and red blood cells. - . Thyroid Hormones Six thyroid tests were conducted by LabCorp (Kansas City, MO): thyroid . stimulating hormone (TSH; /iIU/ml); serum thyroxine (T4; /tg/dL); free thyroxine (free T4: ng/dL): serum triiodothyronine (T3; pg/mL); thyroid hormone binding ratio (THBR, %, previously referred to as T3 Uptake) and free thyroxine index (FT). TSH, free T4 and T3 were determined by an immunochemiluminometric assay (ICMA). T4 and THBR were determined by a cloned enzyme donor immunoassay (CEDIA). FTI was calculated by multiplying T4 and THBR. 3M Company Page 10 of 121 Fluorochemical Analyses - Sera samples were extracted using an ion-pairing extraction procedure (Hansen et al, 2001). The extracts were quantitatively analyzed for PFOS (perfluorooctanesulfonate), PFOA (perfluorooctanoate), PFHS (perfluorohexanesulfonate), PFOSAA (N-ethyl perfluorooctanesulfonamidoacetate), M570 (N-methyl perfluorooctanesulfonamidoacetate), PFOSA (perfluorooctanesulfonateamide) and M556 (perfluorooctaiiesulfonamidoacetate) using high-pressure liquid chromatography/electrospray tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC/ESMSMS) and evaluated versus an extracted curve from a human serum matrix. Endogenous levels of certain fluorochemical were determined in the standard serum matrix and additional fluorochemical was spiked into the matrix. The total amount of each specific fluorochemical (endogenous + spiked) was used to construct an extracted standard curve. All serum fluorochemical analyses were determined by Northwest Bioanaltyical Laboratory Inc. (Salt Lake City, UT). A description of the distribution of the serum fluorochemical levels is reported elsewhere for Antwerp (Olsen et al, 2001b) and Decatur (Olsen et al, 2001c). For Antwerp, all employee serum values for PFOS and PFOA values were above the lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ). There was one employee (0.3 percent) with a PFHS value below th$ LLOQ (0.0027 ppm) and one employee (0.3 percent) with a M570 below the LLOQ (0.0057 ppm). There were 111 employees (44 percent) with PFOSAA values below the LLOQ (0.006 ppm); 88 employees (35 percent) were below the LLOQ (0.001 ppm) for PFOSA; and 13 employees (5 percent) were below the LLOQ (0.0043 3M Company Page i 1 of 121 ppm) for M556. For Decatur, all employee serum values for PFOS, PFHS, PFOA and M570 were above the respective lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ). There were 8 (3 percent) employees with PFOSAA values below the LLOQ (0.006 ppm); 111 employees (42 percent) were below the LLOQ forPFOSA (0.001 ppm); and 13 employees (5 percent) were below the LLOQ for M556 (0.0043 ppm). For statistical analysis purposes, serum fluorochemical values that were less than the LLOQ were assumed to be the midpoint between zero and the LLOQ. A total organic fluorine index (TOF) was determined by calculating the percent of each specific fluorochemical's molecular weight that was attributed to organic fluorine (PFOS (64.7%); PFHS (61.9%); PFOA (69.0%); PFOSAA (55.3%); PFOSA (64.7%); M570 (56.6%) and M556 (58.1%)) multiplied by the ppm measured for each fluorochemical and then summed across all seven fluorochemicals. Data Analyses Serum PFOS and PFOA levels were the predominant fluorochemicals as the other five analytes were measured at considerably lower levels (Olsen et al 2001b; 2001c); therefore, PFOS and PFOA were the only two specific fluorochemicals analyzed as explanatory variables in regression models. TOF was also considered in the analyses which took into account these other analytes in an aggregate index (see above definition). Descriptive simple and stratified analyses, Pearson correlation coefficients, ANOVA and multivariable regression were used to evaluate associations between PFOS, PFOA and TOF and each hematological and clinical chemistry test and thyroid hormone assay. For stratified analyses, employees were divided into quartiles of their serum PFOS 3M Company Page 12 of 121 distribution. Age, body mass index, current alcohol consumption (drinks per day) and cigarette use (cigarettes smoked per day), years worked at Antwerp or Decatur, and type of job (production versus non-production) were potential confounding factors that were considered in the analyses. Production jobs included cell operators, chemical operators, mill operators and crew supervisors. Non-production jobs included engineers, QA/AC laboratory and research workers, secretaries and managers. Multivariable regression models were fitted with PFOS and/or PFOA analyzed as a continuous variable(s). Significance of coefficients was considered at p < .05. Natural log transformations of the dependent variables were performed, when necessary, to normalize variables and to enhance model fit. Study results were analyzed using the SAS System (1990). RESULTS Altogether, there were 255 Antwerp employees (206 male and 49 female) and 263 Decatur employees (215 male, 48 female) who participated in the 2000 fluorochemical medical surveillance program (Table 1). Seventy three percent of the Antwerp male employees and 75 percent of the Decatur employees worked in production activities. Only 12 percent of the Antwerp female employees worked in production activities compared to 63 percent of the Decatur female employees. Provided in Table 2 are the mean PFOS, PFOA and TOF values, demographic values and clinical chemistry and thyroid values for male employees stratified by location and production or non-production work activities. Regardless of the production categorization, Antwerp male employees compared to Decatur employees had lower 3M Company Page 13 of 121 serum PFOS and PFOA levels; were significantly younger; had lower mean BMIs; worked fewer years; drank, on average, more alcoholic beverages per day; had higher mean HDL and total bilirubin values; and had lower mean triglyceride, alkaline phosphatase, GGT, AST and ALT values. Mean thyroid hormone values tended to be higher among Antwerp employees. All mean values were within reference ranges. Comparable findings were observed for Antwerp female employees compared to Decatur female employees (Table 3). Given the differences between Antwerp and Decatur employees, univariate analyses were initially stratified by location. Antwerp data, stratified by gender and production, are provided in Tables 4 through 12. In a similar fashion Decatur employee data are provided in Tables 13-24. The Decatur data also include employee urinalysis results. Antwerp production male employee data (n = 150), stratified by quartile of serum PFOS distribution, is presented in three sequential tables for clinical chemistry (Table 4) and thyroid hormones (Table 5) and hematology (Table 6) results. The highest quartile (4th) mean serum PFOS level was 2.61 ppm (range 1.76 - 6.24 ppm) compared to the lowest quartile (1st) mean serum PFOS level of 0.29 ppm (range 0.04 - 0.41 ppm). Production workers in the highest quartile of serum PFOS levels were older and worked more years at Antwerp. There were no significant mean differences between the quartiles for BMI, cigarettes smoked or drinks per day. There was only one significant difference between the four quartile levels for any clinical chemistry, thyroid hormone or hematology comparisons. This significant difference was the comparison of the mean BUN value between the 1st and 3rd quartiles. 3M Company Page 14 of 121 In a similar fashion for the 56 non-production Antwerp male employees, their clinical chemistry, thyroid hormone and hematology results are presented in Tables 7, 8 and 9, respectively, for their quartile distribution of serum PFOS. In this analysis, the highest quartile had a mean serum PFOS level of 0.90 ppm (range 0.49 -1.76) compared to a mean of 0.13 ppm (range 0.05-0.20 ppm) in the lowest quartile. No significant mean differences were observed for demographic (Table 7), clinical chemistry (Table 7), thyroid hormone (Table 8) or hematology (Table 9) comparisons between the serum PFOS quartile distributions. Among the 49 Antwerp production and non-production female employees analyzed as a group (Table 10), the highest quartile mean serum PFOS level was 0.26 ppm (range 0.15 - 0.55) compared to the lowest quartile mean serum PFOS level of 0.06 ppm (range 0.04 - 0.08 ppm). The highest serum PFOS quartile did not significantly differ demographically than the other three quartiles (Table 10). The lower three quartiles had some significant differences between themselves for the mean comparisons of years worked and drinks per day. Only one clinical chemistry, BUN, was significantly different between the quartiles as the 3rd and 4th quartiles had higher mean BUN values than the 1st quartile. All mean values were within reference ranges. No significant mean thyroid hormone (Table 11) or hematology (Table 12) difference was observed between the quartiles. A total of 161 Decatur production male employees were stratified based on their quartile distribution of serum PFOS (Table 13). The highest quartile had a 3.22 ppm mean serum PFOS level (range 2.31 -10.06) compared to 0.55 ppm mean serum PFOS level in the lowest quartile. There were no significant mean demographic differences 3M Company Page 15 o f 121 between the four quartiles and the only clinical chemistry test that was significantly different was ALT (Table 13). The highest quartile had a significantly higher mean ALT level (44 IU/ml) compared to the 1st (33 IU/ml), 2nd (32 IU/ml) or 3rd (33 IU/ml) quartiles. There were no significant mean differences for the Decatur male production employee quartile distributions for thyroid hormones (Table 14), hematology (Table 15) or urinalysis (Table 16) results. Among the 54 Decatur non-production male employees (Table 17), their highest quartile mean serum PFOS level was 1.66 ppm (range 1.00 - 2.95 ppm) compared to the lowest quartile mean of 0.19 ppm (range 0.06 - 0.29 ppm). The highest quartile worked almost twice as long as the lowest quartile (Table 17). There were no significant differences in other demographics, clinical chemistries (Table 17), thyroid hormones (Table 18), hematology (Table 19) or urinalysis (Table 20) results among the quartile distributions. Among the 48 Decatur production and non-production female employees (Table 21), the highest quartile had a mean serum PFOS level of 2.04 ppm (range 1.38 - 3.62 ppm) compared to the lowest quartile mean serum PFOS level of 0.20 ppm (range 0.06 0.31 ppm). There were no significant differences between the quartiles in relation to demographics (Table 21), clinical chemistries (Table 21) or thyroid hormones (Table 22). The third quartile had a significantly lower mean platelet count than the 1st quartile (Table 23): however, the fourth quartile was not significantly lower than the I s' quartile. Urinalysis findings did not differ by quartile (Table 24). Presented in Table 25 are the number (and percentage) of Antwerp or Decatur employees which had above reference range values for hepatic clinical chemistry tests. 3M Company Page 16 of 121 These findings in Table 25 are stratified by serum PFOS quartile distribution within each of the gender and production/non-production categories. Because each sub-population has a different serum PFOS quartile distribution, comparisons should only be done within each location-, production- and gender-specific category. Also presented is the number and percentage of employees who had one or more liver enzyme and bilirubin tests above the reference ranges (see aggregate total liver panel). The percentage of Antwerp employees whose liver enzyme tests were above reference range values was comparable for production and non-production male employees. Among Decatur employees, there was a higher percentage of production male employees in the 4th quartile for ALT, GGT and the total liver panel than the other quartiles. For non-production male employees, the highest percentages occurred in the second or third quartiles. Neither Antwerp or Decatur female employees had percentages consistent with any trend in the quartile distributions. Provided in Tables 26 and 27 are the serum PFOS quartile distributions for the combined 421 Antwerp and Decatur production and non-production male employees. The highest quartile (4,,,) had a mean serum distribution of 2.69 ppm (range 1.69 - 10.06 ppm) compared to 0.27 ppm mean (range 0.04 --0.42 ppm) compared to the lowest ( lsl) quartile distribution. It is important to note that the number (and percentages) of Antwerp versus Decatur employees in each of these four quartiles differ (see footnote to Table 26). In the lowest (1st) quartile, there is a greater percentage of Antwerp than Decatur male employees and more non-production than production employees. In the subsequent higher serum PFOS quartiles, the percentage of Decatur production male employees increased and the percentage of non-production male employees, whether 3M Company Page 17 of 121 from Antwerp or Decatur, decreased. These differences were also reflected in the demographics between quartiles. For example, demographically the trend from the lowest to highest quartile increased with age, BMI and years worked and decreased with the mean number of alcohol drinks per day. Likewise, the means of the clinical chemistry and thyroid hormone tests were reflective of the higher percentage of Antwerp employees in the lower quartiles and higher percentage of Decatur employees in the higher quartiles. Mean triglyceride and alkaline phosphatase levels were lower and total bilirubin levels were higher in the lowest quartile compared to the highest quartile. For thyroid hormones, T3 was lower in the Is' quartile compared to the 4th quartile and THBR was significantly higher. Combined analyses of Antwerp and Decatur production and non-production female employees (Tables 28 and 29) presented a similar distribution of employees by location and production pattern as was observed with the production and non-production male employees (Tables 26 and 27). Antwerp female employees predominated in the lowest quartile and Decatur female employees predominated in the highest quartile. This distribution difference is then seen with the lower mean age, BMI and alkaline phosphatase findings and the greater number o f drinks per day and higher total bilirubin levels in the lowest quartile compared to the highest quartile. Also observed was a lower mean GGT and blood glucose level in the lowest quartile when compared to the highest quartile. There were no thyroid hormone differences between the quartile distributions (Table 29). Summarized in Table 30 are the combined number of Antwerp and Decatur employees (and percentages) who had hepatic clinical chemistry tests above reference 3M Company Page 18 of 121 range values stratified by quartile of the serum PFOS distribution. Among male employees, twelve percent of the employees had above reference range values for ALT and GGT in the 4th quartile compared to 4 to 8 percent in the 1st through 3rdquartiles. For the total liver panel, 23 percent of the male employees had one or more liver clinical chemistry tests above the reference range value compared to 14 to 16 percent in the lower three quartiles. No differences were observed within the female employee population. These percentages were not adjusted for potential confounding factors (e.g., BMI). Because the higher liver enzyme function test results in the 4thquartile might be confounded by demographics (higher BMI, older age) and/or clinical chemistry tests (triglycerides) reflective of dietary differences, multivariable regression analyses were conducted on the combined Antwerp and Decatur male employee participants. Each regression model had the following variables: production job (yes = 1; no = 0); Antwerp/Decatur (1 = Antwerp; 0 = Decatur); age, BMI, cigarettes per day, drinks per day and years worked. For the analyses that involved hepatic clinical chemistry tests, triglycerides was also considered a potential explanatory variable. Regression models analyzed serum PFOS, serum PFOA, serum PFOS and PFOA, and total organic fluorine (TOF). Provided in tables 31 through 34 are the analyses for these fluorochemical comparisons in relation to their effect on cholesterol, adjusted for the other explanatory variables. Serum PFOS was positively associated with cholesterol although its explanation of the variability of cholesterol in the model was less than 1 percent (see partial R: ). (Note: This positive association is opposite that of the well-established negative association between serum cholesterol and PFOS that have been shown to occur 9 3M Company Page 19 o f 121 in toxicological studies at threshold serum doses that were approximately 2 orders of magnitude higher than those serum PFOS levels observed in these employees.) Like PFOS (Table 31), there were positive significant associations each for PFOA (Table 32) and TOF (Table 34) with cholesterol but the model that jointly examined the effects of PFOS and PFOA found neither to be significant (Table 33). Again, this is contrary to the toxicological research that has shown PFOA lowers serum cholesterol. Age and drinks per day were significant variables in the model with cholesterol. PFOS and TOF were not significantly associated with HDL, but PFOA was significantly negatively associated (Tables 35 through 38). As to be expected, BMI and drinks per day were strongly associated with HDL. Analysis of triglycerides showed PFOS, PFOA and TOF were positively associated (Tables 39 through 42). PFOA appeared to be the more significant predictor than PFOS. (Note: PFOS and PFOA have decreased serum triglyceride levels at toxicological doses, not increased serum triglyceride levels.) Age, BMI and cigarettes smoked per day were significant variables in the triglyceride models found in Tables 39 through 42. Provided in Figures 1 through 3 are scatter plots of the simple linear regressions between the natural log of serum triglycerides and PFOA for Antwerp male, Decatur male and Antwerp and Decatur female employees. Multivariable regression model results for the hepatic clinical chemistry analyses are found in Tables 43 through 62. Because of the potential confounding positive association with serurp triglycerides, this variable is added to these models. No significant associations were observed with PFOS, PFOA and TOF in relation to alkaline phosphatase (Tables 43 through 46), GGT (Tables 47 through 50) or AST (Tables 51 through 54). Although PFOS or PFOA were not significantly associated with ALT 3M Company Page 20 of 121 (Tables 55 - 57), TOF was positively associated with ALT (Table 58). PFOS, PFOA or TOF were not significant predictors of total bilirubin (Tables 59-62). Multivariable regression analyses of the thyroid hormones resulted in no significant associations of PFOS, PFOA or TOF with TSH (Tables 63 - 66), T4 (Tables 67 - 70), Free T4 (Tables 71 - 74), THBR (Tables 75 - 78) or FTI (Tables 79 - 82). PFOS, PFOA and TOF were positively associated with T3 although contributed minimally to the variation explained in the model (see partial R2). DISCUSSION . Although voluntary participation rates ranged from 53 percent (Decatur) to 75 percent (Antwerp), the 2000 fluorochemical medical surveillance program had the most (in absolute numbers) employee male and female participants ever for both locations. This is likely due to a combination of factors including 1) greater knowledge of the collective (individual and research) value of the fluorochemical medical surveillance program: 2) employee awareness about the persistence and prevalence of PFOS in human tissue and the environment; and 3) the company's May 16,2000 phase out announcement that it would cease production of perfluorooctanyl chemistry in certain repellents and surfactants by the end of 2000. Serum PFOS and PFOA levels were comparable to those previously reported for employees at these manufacturing operations. Serum levels appeared to be log normally distributed with the highest values for PFOS at 10 ppm. This upper tail of the serum PFOS distribution was also reported in a random sample analysis of Decatur employees conducted in 1998 (Olsen et al 1999b). Separate reports examine the employees' serum 3M Company Page 21 of 121 PFOS, PFOA, PFHS, PFOSAA, M570, PFOSA and M556 levels measured in the 2000 fluorochemical medical surveillance program with their workplace operations in Antwerp (Olsen et al, 2001b) and Decatur (Olsen et al, 2001c). We continued to observe consistent differences between Antwerp and Decatur employees regarding their demographics and lifestyle differences. In particular, Antwerp male employees, on average, were younger (and thus worked less), had much lower BMIs and drank more alcoholic beverages than their Decatur counterparts. All three differences can be important confounding variables when analyzing lipid and hepatic clinical chemistry tests. We have also consistently seen higher total bilirubin values among Antwerp employees since 1995 which may be partially attributable to a greater prevalence of Gilbert's syndrome (Olsen et al 1998a; 1999a). An inconsistent finding from these aggregate analyses was the positive associations in the multivariable models reported between PFOS and serum cholesterol and PFOA and serum cholesterol and triglycerides. There is a substantial body of toxicological literature to suggest these associations are spurious because PFOS (in rats and primates) has been reported to decrease serum cholesterol and triglyceride levels (3M Company 2000; Haughom and Spydevold 1992; Ikeda et al 1987; Pastoor et al 1987; Seacat et al 2001a; 2001b; Sohlenius et al 1993). On the other hand, there is inconsistent evidence for hypolipidemia with PFOA in rodents (Pastoor et al 1987; Haughom and Spydevold 1992) and no effect observed in primates (Butenhoff et al 2001). In primates, there was no association observed between PFOA and cholesterol or triglycerides (Butenhoff et al 2001). There is no toxicological evidence that at the serum PFOA levels observed in our medical surveillance program that PFOA would have resulted in 3M Company Page 22 of 121 hyperlipidemic associations. In addition, the PFOA levels observed among Antwerp and Decatur employees in 2000 was lower than those measured in 3M's Cottage Grove manufacturing employees whose serum PFOA levels have been assayed as high as 100 ppm. Hypolipidemic or hyperlipidemic effects have not been associated with serum PFOA levels among these Cottage Grove employees (Gilliland and Mandel 1996; Olsen et al, 2000). Most recently, the 2000 Cottage Grove fluorochemical medical surveillance program analysis again showed no association between serum PFOA levels and serum cholesterol or triglycerides (as seen in Figure 4). (Note: The serum PFOA levels graphed in Figure 4 are substantially higher than those cited in Figures 1 through 3 for the Antwerp and Decatur male and female employees.) We therefore believe that it is highly unlikely that these are causal associations observed in the 2000 fluorochemical medical surveillance data between PFOA and serum cholesterol and triglycerides. Previous toxicological and epidemiological research has also not suggested positive associations between elevated serum liver enzymes results and serum PFOS or PFOA that were at the levels observed in the Antwerp and Decatur employee population (3M Company, 2000; Butenhoff et al 2001; Gilliland and Mandel 1996; Olsen et al 1998a; 1999a; 2000; Seacat et al 2001a; 2001b). In this 2000 fluorochemical medical surveillance program we observed, among Decatur production employees, a significantly greater mean ALT among those workers in the highest serum PFOS quartile distribution compared to the other-three quartiles. This highest quartile of Decatur employees also had the greatest percentage of employees with ALT (28%) and GGT (15%) values above the reference range as well as the total liver panel (35%). A comparable percentage (36%) was observed among Decatur non-production employees in the second lowest 3M Company Page 23 of 121 quartile with one or more hepatic clinical chemistry tests above the reference range. When male employees were combined by production status and location (as seen in Table 30), we reported an upward trend in the percentage of employees in the highest quartile with values above the reference range for ALT (12%), GGT (12%) and total liver panel (23%). However, after adjusting the employees' individual liver function values by potential confounding factors including age, BMI, number of alcoholic drinks per day, cigarettes per day and serum triglyceride values, we found no association between liver function values and PFOS or PFOA. We therefore suspect that the univariate associations were influenced by known confounders of liver function analyses A battery of thyroid hormone tests were included in the 2000 fluorochemical medical surveillance program due to preliminary, albeit biologically inconsistent, findings in toxicological studies that have yet to be completed. Our surveillance data do not suggest any biologically significant associations between thyroid hormones and employees' measured serum PFOS, PFOA or calculated TOF levels. A retrospective cohort mortality study of Decatur employees from 1961-1997 reported 3 deaths from bladder cancer compared to 0.2 expected in the subgroup of workers with the highest potential exposure to perfluorooctanesulfonyl fluoride (POSF)based chemistry and materials (Alexander 2001b). It was not determined whether this association was fluorochemical-related or possibly due to other non-fluorochemical occupational or non-oocupational exposures. An analysis of episode of cares (Olsen et al 2001d) reported a higher reoccurrence of cystitis among female Decatur chemical plant workers than their counteiparts in the film plant although the actual prevalence of unique individuals with episodes of care regarding cystitis was similar. No differences were 3M Company Page 24 of 121 reported among male chemical and film plant employees. The analysis of these 2000 fluorochemical medical surveillance data showed no association between the prevalence of abnormal urinalyses and employee serum PFOS levels among the Decatur employees. Limitations of this study design include its cross-sectional nature which does not adequately allow for the assessment of temporal changes. However, the large participation of employees in 2000 who may have participated in the 1994/95 and/or 1997 fluorochemical medical surveillance programs at these two manufacturing sites has enabled a longitudinal analysis to be performed. This longitudinal analysis is the focus of a separate 3M investigation (Olsen et al, 2001a). Although still very limited in numbers, we were able to provide separate cross-sectional analyses for female employees, for the first time, which showed no biologically relevant associations between ser;m PFOS and/or PFOA levels with clinical chemistries, thyroid hormones or hematology results. Because 3M has announced a phase-out of the production of perfluorooctanyl chemistryrelated materials, we anticipate that the Antwerp and Decatur employee population mean PFOS and PFOA serum levels should be lower when measured during the next fluorochemical medical surveillance program. These future analyses may be hindered by the fewer employees in the workforce as a consequence of the phase-out announced by the company. Another study limitation was the lower serum PFOS and PFOA levels measured among these employees compared with those suspected to cause effects in laboratory animals. ' In summary, the findings from the 2000 fluorochemical medical surveillance program continue to suggest that Antwerp and Decatur fluorochemical production and non-production employees do not show substantial changes in serum hepatic enzymes, 3M Company Page 25 of 121 cholesterol, or lipoproteins associated with the serum PFOS and PFOA levels measured. A separate longitudinal analysis is reported for the fluorochemical medical surveillance Antwerp and Decatur program data from 1994 through 2000. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . The investigators acknowledge the contributions of Kimberly Young in the prepartion of this report. REFERENCES 3M Company Page 26 of 121 3M Company (2000). SIDS Initial assessment repot: Perfluorooctane sulfonic acid and its salts. St. Paul (MN):3M Company, (unpublished report). Alexander BH (2001a). Mortality study of workers employed at the 3M Cottage Grove facility. Minneapolis (MN):University of Minnesota, (unpublished report). Alexander BH (2001b). Mortality study of workers employed at the 3M Decatur facility. Minneapolis (MN):University of Minnesota, (unpublished report). Butenhoff JL, Costa G, Elcombe C, Farrar D, Hansen K, Iwai H, Jung R, Kennedy G, Lieder P, Olsen GW, Thomford P. Toxicity of ammonium perfluorooctanoate (APFO) in cynomolgus monkeys after 26 weeks of oral dosing. St. Paul (MN):3M Company, (unpublished report) ` Gilliland FD, Mandel JS (1993). Mortality among employees of a perfluorooctanoic acid production plant. J Occup Med 35:950-954. Gilliland FD, Mandel JS (1996). Serum perfluorooctanoic acid and hepatic enzymes, lipoproteins and cholesterol: a study of occupationally exposed men. Am J Ind Med 129:560-568. Hansen KJ, Clemen LA, Ellefson ME, Johnson JHO (2001). Compound-specific, quantitative characterization of organic fluorochemicals in biological matrices. Environ Sei Technol 35:766-770. Haughom B, Spydevold O (1992). The mechanism underlying the hypolipmie effect of perfluooctanoic acid (PFOA). perfluoroctanesulphonic acid (PFOSA) and clofibric acid. Biochemica et Biophysica Acta 1128:65-72. Ikeda T, Fukuda K, Mori I, Enomoto M, Komai T, Suga T (1987). Induction of cytochrome P-450 and peroixome proliferation in rat liver by perfluorinated octanesulfonic acid. In: Perixosmes in Biology and Medicine. (HD Fahmi and H Sies, eds) New York:Springer Verlag, pp 304-308. Olsen GW. Burris JM, Mandel JH, Zobel LR (1998a). An epidemiologic investigation of clinical chemistries, hematology and hormones in relation to serum levels of perfluorooctane sulfonate in male fluorochemical production employees. St. Paul:3M Company (unpublished report). Olsen GW, Gilliland FD, Burlew MM, Burris JM, Mandel JS, Mandel JH (1998b). An epidemiologic investigation of reproductive hormones in men with occupational exposure to perfluorooctanoic acid. JOEM (40(7):614-621. 3M Company Page 27 of 121 Olsen GW, Burris JM, Mandel JH, Zobel LR (1999a). Serum periluorooctane sulfonate and hepatic and lipid clinical chemistry tests in fluorochemical production employees. JOEM 41(9):799-806. Olsen GW, Logan PW, Simpson CA, Hansen KJ, Burris JM, Burlew MM, Schumpert JC, Mandel JH (1999b). Fluorochemical exposure assessment of Decatur chemical and film plant employees. St. Paul:3M Company (unpublished report). Olsen GW, Burris JM, Burlew MM, Mandel JH (2000). Plasma cholecystokinn and hepatic enzymes, cholesterol and lipoproteins in ammonium perfluorooctanoate production workers. Drug Chem Toxicol 23(4):603-620. Olsen GW, Burlew MM, Burris JB, Mandel JM (2001a). A longitudinal analysis of serum perlfuorooctanesulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoate (PFOA) levels in relation to lipid and clinifcal chemistry test results from male employee participants of the 1994/95,1997 and 2000 fluorochemical medical surveillance program. St. Paul, MN:3M Company (unpublished report). Olsen GW, Schmickler MN, Tierens JM, Logan PW, Burris JM, Burlew MM, Lundberg JK. Mandel JH (2001b). Descriptive summary of serum fluorochemical levels among employee participants of the year 2000 Antwerp fluorochemical medical surveillance program. St. Paul:3M Company (unpublished report). Olsen GW, Logan PW, Simpson CA, Burris JM, Burlew MM, Lundberg JK, Mandel JH (2001c). Descriptive summary of serum fluorochemical levels among employee participants of the year 2000 Decatur fluorochemical mdical surveillance program. St Paul:3M Company (unpublished report). Olsen GW, Burlew MM, Hocking BB, Skratt JC, Burris JM, Mandel JH (200Id). An epidemiologic analysis of episodes of care of 3M Decatur chemical and film plant employees, 1993-1998. St. Paul MN:3M Company (unpublished report). Pastoor TP, Lee KP, Perri MA, Gillies PJ (1987). Biochemical and morphological studies of ammonium perfluorooctnoate-induced hepatomegaly and peroxisome proliferation. Exp Mol Pathol 47:98-109. SAS Institute, Inc. (1990). SAS Users Guide:Statistics Version 6. Cary, NC:SAS Institute Inc. Seacat AM, Thomford PJ, Hansen KJ, Clemen LA, Case MT, Butenhoff JL (2001a). Sub-chronic dietary toxicity of potassium perfluorooctanesulfonic acid in rats. Toxicol Sci (submitted 2001a). Seacat AM, Thoford PJ, Hansen KJ, Olsen GW, Case MT, Butenhoff JL. Subchronic toxicity studies on perfluorooctanesulfonate potassium salt in cynomolgus monkeys. Toxicol Sci (submitted, 2001b). 3M Company Page 28 o f 121 Sohlenius AK, Eriksson AM, Hogstrom C, Kimland M, DePierre JW (1993). Perfluorooctane sulfonic acid is a potent inducer of peroxisomal fatty acid B-oxidation and other activities known to be affected by peroxisome proliferators in mouse liver. Pharmacol Toxicol 72:90-93. Table 1 Number of Employee Participants in the 2000 Antwerp and Decatur Medical Surveillance Programs Company Page 29 o f 121 Antwerp (N = 255) Male (N = 206) Female (N = 49) Production Non-Production Production Non-Production 150(73)* 56(27)* ' 6(12)* 43(88)* Decatur (N = 263) Male (N = 215) Female (N = 48) Production Non-Production Production Non-Production 161(75)* 54(25)* 30 (63)* 18(37)* "'Percent in parenthesis PFOS PFOA TOP Age BMI Years Worked Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Cholesterol . IIDL Triglycerides Aik Phos GOT AST ALT Table 2 Mean Value for Male Employee Participants' Serum Fluorochemical Levels, Demographics, Clinical Chemistries and Thyroid Results .. . Company Page 30 of 121 All Antwerp (N = 206) Decatur (N = 215) 0.96d 1.40 1.03d 1.90 I.6011 2.65 37d 43 24.8d 28.8 I3C 16 46 l.ld 0.1 218 215 55d 44 I24d 191 60d 74 23d 31 23c 26 23d 35 P r o d u c t i o n ___________ Non-Production Antwerp (N = 150) Decatur (N = 161) Antwerp (N = 56) Decatur (N = 54) 1.16* 1.28d 1.63 2.34 0.42b 0.34b 0.73 0.59 1.97d 3.18 0.61b 1.07 36d 42 40b 45 24.6d 28.9 25.2" 28.4 12* 15 15c 22 56 25 l.ld 0.1 l.ld 0.2 215 217 225" 209 55d 43 55e 45 124d 198 122b 169 60d 76 60* 67 23d 31 26b 29 23d 26 24 25 22d 36 25 31 Total Bilirubin Direct Bilirubin BUN Creatinine Glucose TSH T4 FreeT4 T3 THBR FTI l.0u 0.l` I9d 1.2 85d 2.0" 8.2 l.l* 13lb 34" 2.7'1 * p < .05 compared lo Decatur (t test) bp < .01 compared lo Decatur (l test) c p < .001 compared to Decatur (t test) d p < .0001 compared to Decatur (t test) 0.7 0.1 15 1.1 95 2.9 8.4 1.1 125 31 2.5 Table 2 (continued) 1.0d 0.1" I9d l.ld 84d 2.0* 8.3 1.1* 132* 34d 2.7d 0.7 0.1 15 1.2 95 3.1 8.4 1.1 127 30 2.5 l.ld 0.1 19d 1.2 87* 1.9 8.1 1.1 126 35d 2.7a _ ,.vi Company Page 31 of l?.i 0.8 0.1 15 1.1 94 2.2 8.5 1.1 120 31 2.5 3M Compan Page 32 of 12 Table 3 Mean Values for Female Employee Participants' Serum Fluorochemical Levels, Demographics, Clinical Chemistries and Thyroid Results PFOS PFOA TOF Age BMI Years Worked Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Cholesterol HDL Triglycerides Aik Phos GGT AST ALT Total Bilirubin Direct Bilirubin BUN Creatinine Glucose TSH T4 Free T4 ' T3 THBR FTI Antwerp (N = 49)_______ Decatur (N = 48) 0.13d 0.93 0.07d 1.23 0.17d 1.76 36 42 22.8d 27.7 12a 13 2d 5 0.5d 0.1 208 200 68a 59 VO oPoer 133 46a 65 12d 18 18 ` 20 13d 19 0.6 0.1 0.1 16 12 0.9 0.8 85 87 2.3 2.3 10.2 9.3 l . l b 1.0 00or 128 30* 28 2.9d 2.5 3p < .05 compared to Decatur (student t test) bp < .01 compared to Decatur (student t test) c p < .001 compared to Decatur (student t test) d p < .0001 compared to Decatur (student t test) Tabic 4 Antwerp Male Production Employee (N = 150) Fluorochemical, Demographic and Clinical Chemistry Results by Quartile of Serum PFOS Distribution . ^Company Page 33 of 121 PPOS Quartile 1(N s 37) Mean Median SD Ranne 0.291,4 0.33 0 .1 1 0.04-0.41 Quartile tj 2 ,II 38) Mean Median SD Kanne 0.581,4 0.57 0 .1 2 0.41 -0.78 Quartile 3 (N 38) Mean Median SD Range , | 8 U 1.16 0 .2 2 0.79-1.66 Mean 2 .6 I ,U Quartile 4 (N = 37) Median SD Ranne 2.27 1.06 1.67-6.24 PFOA 0.944 0.42 1.06 0.02-4.03 LSI 0.72 1.70 0.07-7.04 1 .0 2 1 .0 0 0.60 0.21-3.27 1.6 6 * 1.64 0.81 0.25-3.59 TOP 0.92" -4 0.60 0.78 0.05 - 3.03 I.631,4 1.08 1.26 0.42-5.69 I.82'-4 1.80 0.55 1.03-3.14 3.51,A1 3.30 1.18 1.92-7.36 Age 334 34 7 2 3 -4 8 37 36 9 2 1 -5 6 37 36 9 2 2 -5 5 39' 39 8 2 8 -5 5 BMI 24.3 23.8 2.7 19.2-33.2 24.9 24.3 3.1 19.0-34.7 25.0 25.3 2 .8 17.5-32.3 24.3 Years Worked gl.1.4 5 6 2-25 1 2 * II 9 2-29 1 2 ' 13 7 1-29 15' 24.7 3.0 17.8-30.9 15 6 5-29 Cigarettes/day 5 0 7 0 -2 0 5 08 0-25 40 6 0 -2 0 7 0 8 0-25 Drinks/day 1 .2 1.0 1 0-4 l.l 9 1 .0 0 - 4 0.9 0.7 0.9 0-4 l.l 0.7 1 .2 0 -5 Cholesterol 207 2 0 2 39 145-308 216 217 41 148-295 212 196 41 105 - 297 226 232 46 122-316 HDL Triglycerides 57 102 57 13 3 2 -8 5 52 49 1 0 1 0 2 49 34-221 125 113 87 3 8 -7 2 54 53 1 2 2 9 -8 0 35 - 546 140 113 124 41-731 57 51 19 26-119 130 ICS 75 42 - 346 AlkPhos 60 61 IS 3 4 -9 6 60 60 15 30-113 59 59 IS 3 0 -9 4 61 62 14 2 1 -8 9 QGT 20 16 II 8 - 5 3 24 2 0 16 8-89 21 19 11 10-64 26 19 19 7-85 AST 24 24 8 13-58 24 23 5 16-41 22 21 5 13-33 23 2 2 6 15-39 ALT 23 Total Bilirubin 1 .0 22 1 .0 10 11-71 0.3 0 .6 - 1 .6 22 1.0 21 8 10-43 0.9 0.4 0.5 -2 .0 22 20 9 9-46 1 .0 1 .0 0.3 0.5 -2 .3 20 1 .0 2 0 9 8-45 0.9 0.3 0.4 - 2.2 Direct Bilirubin 0 .1 a t 0.04 0 .0 - 0 . 2 0 .1 O.t 0 .1 0.0-0.3 0 .1 0.1 0.03 0 .0 - 0 . 2 0 .1 0 .1 0 .1 0.0-0.4 BUN I8 1 17 4 11-25 18 18 4 12-25 2 0 * 19 5 14-31 19 19 4 11-30 Creatinine Glucose l.l 85 *> 0 . 2 0 .9 - 1.5 87 19 31-131 l.l 86 l.l 0 .2 0 .8 - 1.7 l.l l.l 0 . 2 0 .8 - 2 . 0 8 8 16 49-113 84 85 2 1 45-168 l.l 80 1.0 0 .2 83 2 0 0.8-1.5 40-120 1 Mean is significantly different (P < .OS, Bouferroni (Dunn) I lest) from die mean of die I" quartile 1 Mean is significantly different (P < .OS, Bnnfenoni (Dunn) t test) from (lie mean of the 2" 1 quartile 3 Mean is significantly different (P < .OS, Bonferroni (Dunn) I test) from the mean of the 3"*quartile 4 Mean is sisniflcanllv different (P < .OS, Bouferroiii (Dunn) I lest) from Die mean of the 4'11quartile ' Table 5 Antwerp Male Production Employee (N = ISO) Thyroid Results* by Quartile of Serum PFOS Distribution** Company Page 34 of 121 TSH T4 FreeT4 T3 THBR FTI Quartile 1 (N = 37) Mean Median SD Ranee 1 .8 1 .6 l.l 0 5 -5 .7 8 . 2 8.3 1.5 5 .4 -1 1 .5 1 .2 1.1 0 .2 0 .9 -1 .5 127 127 15 9 5 -1 5 5 34 34 3 28-40 2 . 8 2 . 6 0.5 2 .1 - 4 .2 Quartile 2(N = 38) Mean Median SD Range 2 . 0 2 . 0 0.9 0 .7 -5 .5 8.5 8 . 6 1.4 6 .6 - 1 2 . 0 1.1 l.l 0 .1 0 .9 -1 .4 134 132 17 102-169 34 34 2 29-39 2 . 8 2 . 8 0.4 2 . 1 - 4 . 0 Quartile 3 (N = 38) Mean Median SD Ranee 2 . 0 1.7 1 . 1 0 .8 - 6 . 1 8 . 2 8 .1 1.4 5 .0 -1 1 .5 l . l 1 .1 0 . 2 0 .6 - 1 . 6 132 132 19 9 7 - 1 8 0 34 34 t 3 29-43 2.7 2.7 0.4 1 .9 -3 .9 Quartile 4 (N = 37) Mean Median SD Range 2 . 2 1 .6 3.0 0.5 -1 9 .4 8 .1 8 . 2 1.4 4 .7 - 1 1 .0 . -1 . 1 1 . 1 0 . 2 0 8 1 . 6 136 137 2 2 9 8 - 1 8 5 34 34 2 2 9 - 4 1 2.7 2.7 0.4 1 .6 -3 .6 *No significantly different (P < .05, Bonferroni (Dunn) t lest) mean values **See Table 4'for serum PFOS quartile distribution Table 6 Antwerp Male Production Employee (N = 150) Hematology Results* by Quaitile of Serum PFOS Distribution** _ Company Page 35 o f 121 HCT HOB RBC WBC Platelets Quartile 1 (N = 37) Mean Median SD Range 46 46 3 41-53 15.5 15.4 0 .8 14.0-17.4 5.2 5.2 0.3 4 .6 - 5 .9 7;0 6.4 1 .8 4 .2 -1 1 .4 244 242 57 1 3 8 -3 8 0 Quartile 2 (N = 38) Mean Median SD Range 46 46 3 39-51 15.5 15.5 0.9 1 3 .2 - 18.1 5.1 5.2 0.3 4 .4 -5 .9 7.3 7.1 1 .8 4 .4 -1 1 .5 254 250 51 167 - 373 Quartile 3 (N = 37) Mean Median SD Range 46 46 3 4 0 -5 1 15.4 15.5 0 . 8 13.6-17.3 5.1 5.1 0.3 4 .7 -5 .9 7.6 7.4 1 .6 5 .2 -1 1 .1 253 242 .73 106 - 427 Quartile 4 (N = 37) Mean Median SD Range 46 46 3 4 1 -5 1 15.3 15.3 0.9 13.4-17.1 00 1 5.0 5.0 0.3 7.2 6.9 2 .1 4.5 - 15.6 249 247 55 137-369 *No significantly different (P < .05, Bonferroni (Dunn) t test) mean values **See Table 4 for scrum PFOS quartile distribution Table 7 Antwerp Male Non-Production Employee (N = 56) Fluorochemical, Demographic and Clinical Chemistry Results by Quartile of Serum PFOS Distribution i . . company Page 36 of 121 PFOS Quartile 1(N = 14) Mean Median SD Ranee 0.131-4 0.13 0.05 0.05-0.20 Mean 0.274 Quartile 2(N = 13) Median SD Ranee 0.28 0.03 0.21-0.31 Quartile 3 (N = 15) Mean Median SD Ranee 0.401-4 0.41 Q.05 0.32-0.48 Quartile 4 (N = 14) Mean Median SD Ranee 090'W 0.64 0.47 0.49-1.76 PFOA O.I8 4 0.06 0.46 0.01-1.78 0.194 0.15 0.13 0.05-0.51 0.37 0.32 0.23 0.06-0.85 0.6211 0.42 0.49 0.12-1.78 TOP 0.241,4 0.17 0.34 0.06-1.38 0.31* 0.35 0 .1 1 0.22-0.64 0.604 0.54 0.19 0.37-0.96 l.2 2 UJ 1.09 0.69 0.56-3.01 Age 40 36 13 23 - 58 41 42 6 31-53 38 40 9 25-56 40 41 9 2 6 -5 5 BMI 24.6 25.1 3.3' 19.9-31.3 25.4 24.3 3.3 21.7-34.2 26.1 25.1 3.5 21.1-33.9 24.4 24.2 3.0 20.4 - 30.1 Yean Worked 15 IS 1 0 1-29 17 16 6 6-29 13 13 8 3-26 15 15 9 2 - 2 7 Cigareltea/day 1 0 5 0 - 2 0 0 0 0 0 -0 40 7 0 -2 0 2 0 4 0 -1 0 Drinks/day l.l 0.7 0.9 0.1-2.9 1 .0 0.7 1.3 0.0 -5 .0 l.l l.l 0.9 0.1-3.4 1.3 0.9 1 .6 0 .0 -6 .4 Cholesterol 215 218 37 140 - 293 244 231 43 191-331 219 223 39 157-277 225 231 33 178-277 HDL 55 54 II 4 0 -7 8 61 58 27 31-121 53 49 1 0 4 0 -7 7 54 57 18 3 1 -1 0 0 Triglycerides 94 78 39 45 - 177 159 118 129 36 - 463 1 2 0 99 61 49 - 254 117 95 72 37 - 262 AlkPhos 59 59 17 30-91 62 63 II 4 3 -8 0 61 61 18 3 0 -9 4 57 56 1 2 39-77 OOT 20 18 14 8-65 32 2 1 26 13-111 26 16 2 1 7-80 25 16 26 6-107 AST 24 22 7 15-37 25 23 8 15-44 25 2 2 7 14-38 24 23 8 16-49 ALT 24 2 1 1 0 12-41 27 25 14 10-61 24 2 1 11 1 1 -4 6 24 2 1 11 12-44 Total Bilirubin 1 .2 1 .2 0.3 0.5 -1 .9 1.2 1 .2 0.4 0 .8 - 2 . 0 0.9 0.9 0.3 0 .5 - 1.7 l.l 1 .0 0.3 0 .7 - 1.9 Direct Bilirubin 0 .1 0 .1 0.04 0 .1 - 0 . 2 0.1 0 .1 0.04 0 .1 - 0 .2 0.1 0 .1 0.1 0.0-0.3 0 .1 0 .1 0.03 0 .1 - 0 . 2 BUN 18 18 4 15-27 2 2 19 15 14-71 18 18 4 13-25 19 19 3 14-24 Creatinine 1.2 1 .2 0 .2 1.0 - 1.7 1.5 . l.l 1.3 0.9-5.8 1.2 1 .2 0 .2 0.8-1.5 l.l l.l 0 . 2 0 .8 - 1 .6 Glucose 84 8 6 14 6 0 - 104 8 8 92 15 50-107 87 95 2 0 48-114 91 90 14 6 8 - 115 1 Mean ii significantly different (P < .OS, Bunfemmi (Dunn) I test) from lise mean of the I" quartile 1 Mean if significantly different (P < .05, Bonfenroni (Dunn) t lest) from tlie mean of lise 2"*quartile 1 Mean is significantly different (P < .05, Bonfenroni (Dunn) t test) from the mean of the 3 * quartile u innWVmiitu iiiffrrcnt fP < .05. Bonferroni (Dunn) t test) from lise mean of tlie 4* quartile ; Table 8 Antwerp Male Non-Production Employees (N = 56) Thyroid Results* by Quartile of Serum PFOS Distribution** Company Page 37 of 121 TSH T4 FreeT4 T3 THBR FTI Quartile 1 (N = 14) ________ Quartile 2 (N = 13)________ ________ Quartile 3 (N = IS)_________ _________ Quartile 4 (N = 14) Mean Median SD Ranne______ Mein Median SD Range_______ Mean Median SD Range_______ Mean Median SD Range 2 .1 2 .0 l.l 0.4-4.2 2 . 0 1.9 1.2 0 .7 - 5 .4 .1.6 1.7 1.0 0 .0 3 -4 .3 2 . 0 1 . 6 1.4 1 .0 - 6 . 1 8.9 8.9 l.l 6 . 8 -1 0 .4 7.8 8 . 6 1.5 5 .0 - 9 .4 7.9 7.7 1.3 5 .7 - 9 .8 7.9 7.7 1.9 4 .2 -1 1 .4 0 VO 1 La 1 .2 1 .2 0 .2 1.0-1.5 1.1 1 .2 0 . 2 1.1 1.1 0 .2 0.9-1.5 1 .1 1 . 2 0 . 2 0 . 9 - 1.4 131 128 16 1 0 6 -1 6 4 1 2 0 118 1 2 103 -1 4 5 128 126 25 9 1 -1 6 1 125 129 18 87 -1 4 7 33 34 2 30-36 35 33 4 30-42 35 34 3 28-41 35 34 2 3 2 - 4 1 2.9 3.0 0.3 2 .3 -3 .4 2 . 6 2.7 0.4 2 .0 - 3 .4 2.7 2.7 0.4 2 .1 -3 .5 2.7 2.7 0 . 6 1 .7 - 3 .7 *No lignificantly different (P < .05, Bonfcrroni (Dunn) t test) mean values See Table T for serum PFOS quartile distribution Table 9 Antwerp Male Production Employee (N = 49) Hematology Results* by Quartile of Serum PFOS Distribution** .i Company Page 38 of I? I HCT HOB RBC WBC Platelets Quartile 1 (N = 14) Mean Median SD Ranee 44 44 2 40-48 15.1 IS.0 1.1 12.2-17.0 w-i 1 00 S.l 5.1 0 . 2 6 . 6 6.4 1.3 5 .1 -1 0 .1 228 226 23 1 8 3 -2 5 8 Quartile 2 (N = 13) Mean Median SD Ranee 47 47 2 42-49 15.6 15.5 0.7 14.3 -1 6 .5 5.1 5.1 0.3 4 .6 -5 .6 6.9 6.5 1.7 4.7 -1 0 .7 267 270 49 206 - 353 Quartile 3 (N = 15) Mean Median SD Ranee 46 46 3 4 2 - 5 1 15.4 15.3 0 . 8 1 4 .0 -1 7 .0 5.1 <5.1 0.3 4 .5 -5 .7 6.5 6 . 0 2 . 1 3 .8 - 1 1 .0 225 2 2 1 53 129-335 Quartile 4 (N = 14)_________ Mean Median SD Ranee 45 45 2 4 1 - 5 0 15.3 15.3 0 . 8 1 4 .1 - 17.1 5.0 5.0 0.3 4 .7 - 5 .5 6.5 6.4 1.3 4 .9 - 9 .6 234 234 39 172 - 306 *No significantly different (P < .OS, Bonferroni (Dunn) t test) mean values **See Table 7 for serum PFOS quartile distribution PFOS Antwerp Female Production* and Non-Production Employee (N = 49) Fluorochemical, Demographic and Clinical Chemistry Results by Quartile of Serum PFOS i __ .39 of 121 Quartile 1(N * 12) Mean Median SD Range 0.06 0.06 0 .0 1 0.04-0.08 Mean 0.09 Quartile 2 (N = 1 2 ) Median SD Range 0.09 0 .0 1 0.08-0.10 Mean 0 .1 1 Quartile 3 (N s 13) Median SD Range 0 .1 1 0 .0 1 0.10-0.14 Quartile 4 (N = 12) Mean Median SD Range 0.26,A1 0 .2 1 0.13 0.15-0.55 PFOA 0.03 0 .0 2 0 .0 2 0.01-0.08 0.03 0 .0 2 0 .0 1 0.01-0.06 0.04 0.03 0 .0 1 0.02-0.07 0 .2 0 * 0.09 0.31 0 .0 2 - 1 . II TOP 0.08 0.07 0 .0 2 0.05-0.12 0.09 0 . 0 0 0 .0 1 0.07-0.11 0 .1 2 0 .1 1 0 .0 2 0.09-0.15 0.40,AJ 0.26 0.34 0.13-1.25 Age 32 31 8 24-50 36 34 9 24-52 J 8 36 5 3 1 -4 8 37 36 6 2 9 -5 2 BMI 23.8 23.5 2 .6 18.8-28.3 21.9 2 1 .8 2.5 -18.4-26.3 23.7 21.3 4.6 17.3-32.3 2 1 .8 2 2 . 0 1.7 18.3-25.0 Yean Worked 7* 5 7 ' 0 .8 - 2 2 13 1 2 8 4-29 15' 14 6 9-28 13 13 7 5-29 Cigarettes/day 1 0 3 0 -1 0 2 06 0 -2 0 20 5 0-15 2 0 4 0-13 Drinks/day 0 .2 J 0 .1 0.3 0 - 1 .0 0 .6 0.5 0.4 0.1 -1 .3 0 .6 ' 0.4 0.4 0.0-1.4 0 .6 0.5 0.5 0 . 1 - 1 .6 Cholesterol 205 195 30 155-253 214 224 45 132 - 274 208 197 39 160 - 302 207 197 32 164 - 271 HDL 62 60 II 4 6 -8 5 71 72 19 46-121 6 8 64 18 43 -1 0 4 72 67 16 53-104 Triglycerides H I 99 57 46-248 73 80 27 26-112 98 93 43 46-172 94 87 44 32-171 Aik Phot 53 54 14 2 2 -7 0 44 48 14 .25-61 44 45 1 0 26-61 42 42 II 20-59 AST 21 20 5 14-31 17 17 5 11-27 18 17 6 9-26 17 15 6 1 2 -3 3 ALT 14 1 2 7 8-35 12 12 2 8-17 IS 13 7 6 -3 4 11 11 3 7 -1 8 GOT 12 10 8 3-32 II II 5 2-19 14 1 0 10 7-41 10 10 4 5-23 Total Bilirubin 0 .8 0.7 0 . 2 0.5 -1 .2 1 .0 1 .0 0.3 0 .5 - 1.7 0 .8 0 .8 0.3 0.3-1.3 0.7 0.7 0 . 2 0 .3 - 1 .2 Direct Bilirubin 0 .1 0 .1 0.07 0 .0 - 0 . 2 0 .1 0 .1 0.09 0.1 -0 .4 0 .1 0.1 0.06 0 .0 - 0 . 2 0 .1 -0 . 1 0 . 0 0 . 1 0 . 1 BUN I2 1,4 12 2 9-16 15 15 3 11-23 18' 19 4 9 -2 2 16' 16 3 13-23 Creatinine 0.9 0.9 0 . 2 0 .6 - l.t 0.9 0.9 0 . 2 0.7-1.3 1.0 1.0 0 .2 0.7-1.4 1 .0 -1 . 0 0 . 1 0 . 8 1 . 2 Glucose 75 76 16 3 8 -9 8 8 6 90 1 2 65 -101 89 91 11 65-105 88 90 17 49-117 Number of Female employees by production category by quartile Ql______ Q2______ Q3______ Q4 Production Non-Production 3 10 2 9______ II________13_______ 10 1 Mean is significantly different (P < .05, Bonferroni (Dunn) t lest) from the mean of the 1" quartile 1 Mean is significantly different (P < .OS. Bonferroni (Dunn) t test) from the mean of the 2"*quartile 1 Mean is significantly different (P < .05, Bonferroni (Dunn) t test) from the mean of the 3" 1quartile 4 Mean is significantly different (P < .05, Bonferroni (Dunn) I test) from the mean of the 4* quartile Table 11 Antwerp Female Production and Non-Production Employee (N = 49) Thyroid Results* by Quartile of Serum PFOS Distribution** . Company Page 40 of 121 TSH T4 PreeT4 T3 THBR FT! Quartile 1(N 12) _______ Quartile 2 (N = 12)_______ _______ Quartile 3(N 13)________ ________Quartile 4 (N 12) Mean Median SD Range Mean Median SD Range Mean Median SD Range Mean Median SD Range 2.0 1.9 1.4 0.03-4.9 2.4 2.4 1.0 0.6-4.1 2.2 1.8 1.8 0.03-6.7 2.6 2.0 1.6 1.0-6.5 . 10.7 11.3 2.2 6.6-13.8 9.7 9.7 1.8 6.9 -12.3 ' 10.5 10.7 3.6 4.6-18.3 10.0 9.8 2.3 6.7-13.3* 1.1 l.t 0.1 0.8- 1.3* 1.1 1.2 0.1 0.9-1.3 1.4 1.1 1.0 0.7-4.6 1.0 1.0 0.1 0.9-1.2- 157 164 29 106-191 128 134 22 98-163 159 145 66 81-345 144 135 34 109- 228' 27 27 5 19-34 31 31 4 25-36 31 32 ,7 22-46 29 29 4 24 - 35. 2.8 2.9 0.S 2.1-3.6 2.9 3.0 0.4 2.3-3.6 3.2 2.9 1.6 1.8-8.4 2.8 2.7 0.4 2.2 -3.4 *No significantly different (P < .OS, Bonferroni (Dunn) t test) mean values See Table 10 for serum PFOS quartile distribution Table 12 Antwerp Female Production and Non-Production Employee (N = 49) Hematology Results* by Quartile of Serum PFOS Distribution** jftl Company Page 41 of 121 HCT HOB RBC WBC Platelets Quartile 1 (N = 12)________ ___________ Quartile 2 (N = 12)________ ________ Quartile 3 (N = 13)_________ _________ Quartile 4 (N g 12) Mean Median SD Range Mean Median SI) Runge Mean Median SD Ranee Mean Median SD Range 40 42 4 2 9 - 4 3 41 41 3 3 7 - 4 5 40 41 2 3 5 - 4 4 41 41 2 3 8 - 4 6 13.3 13.6 1.5 9 .4 -1 4 .9 13.5 13.5 0.7 1 2 .5-15.0 13.3 13.3 0 . 8 1 1 .7 -1 4 .8 13.5 13.6 0 . 8 1 2 .5 -1 5 .2 4.6 4.7 0.4 3 .7 -5 .1 4.5 4.5 0.3 4.1 -5 .1 4.5 4.5 0 . 2 4 .2 - 5 .0 4.5 4.5 0.3 4 .2 -5 .1 7.7 7.4 1.9 4 .8 -1 0 .1 6.3 6 . 0 1.7 3 .9 - 9 .3 7.3 7.2 1.4 5 .4 -9 .5 6.5 6.3 1.3 4 .4 - 9 .4 261 246 50 1 8 9 -3 7 9 275 282 49 2 1 1 -3 7 4 277 251 6 8 2 0 2 -4 2 6 269 260 64 1 81-406 No significantly different (P < .05, Donferroni (Dunn) t test) mean values See Table 10 for serum PFOS quartile distribution Table 13 Decatur Male Production Employee (N = 161) Fluorocbemical, Demographic and Clinical Chemistry Results by Quartile of Serum PFOS Distribution . company Page 42 of 121 pros Quartile I (N 40>_________ Mean Median SD Bange 0.5SW 0.55 0.16 0.11-0.75 _________ Quartile 2 (N = 40)'________ Mean Median SD Range i .oi,A 4 0.99 0.18 0.76-1.30 PFOA l.24w 1.24 0.67 0.06-2.72 1.821*4 1.53 1.05 0.35-4.61 TOP I.341 1 -4 1.34 0.52 0.14-2.52 2 .2 0 ,A 4 2.04 0.79 0.89-4.22 Age 43 44 9 2 6 -6 3 42 41 9 26-61 BMI 29.0 28.1 3.7' 24.5 - 37.6 28.4 27.3 5.2 17.2-50.1 Years Worked 1 2 4 13 2 - 3 8 13 5 1 2 2-34 Cigarcttes/day 8 0 13 0 - 4 0 5 0 10 0-30 Drinks/day 0 .2 0 0.3 0 - 1 0.1 0 0 . 2 0 - 1 Cholesterol 214 2 2 0 43 121-296 224 219 42 155-308 _________ Quartile 3 (N = 41)__________ Mean Median SD Range l.74,A< 1.74 0.28 1.32-2.29 __________ Quartile 4 (N = 40) Mean Median SD Range 3.22,aj 3.03 1 .2 2 2.31 - 10.06 2.42m 2.37 1.16 0.76-7.48 3.88i a 1 3.68 1 .8 6 1.52-12.70 3.43,A 4 3.32 ` 1.06 1.75-6.61 5.75, u 5.31 1.77 3.00-12.23 42 43 8 28-57 41 41 1 0 2 7 -6 0 29.9 29.2 5.0 22.6 - 45.5 28.3 28.3 4.0 19.9-39.2 17 2 2 1 2 2 - 3 8 16 14 II 3-38 90 13 0 - 4 0 4 0 9 0-30 0.1 0 0 .2 0 - 1 0 . 1 0 0 . 2 0 .0 - 1 .0 213 208 44 147-384 216 210 39 160-319 HDL 42 Triglycerides 232 Aik Phos 76 GOT 33 AST 26 ALT 334 Total Bilirubin 0.7 41 8 2 9 -5 9 4S 44 8 198 1.79 32 - 633 165 137 1 01 73 2 0 44-142 74 69 2 2 28 2 2 7 -1 4 4 29 23 17 25 7 16-42 26 25 7 31 12 12-63 324 28 17 0.7 0 . 2 0 .3 - 1.5 0 . 8 0 .8 0 .2 33-75 32-550 39-160 10-87 15-51 6 - 103 0 .4 - 1.2 43 42 11 2 9 -7 0 2 0 2 167 138 44 - 792 78 75 2 2 39-139 29 27 13 11-80 25 24 7 7-39 334 31 1 2 10-58 0.7 0.7 0 .2 0 . 4 - l.l 43 195 75 34 29 44,a ' 0.7 43 175 71 30 26 37 0.7 8 128 20 16 11 23 0 .2 28-64 39-796 4 4 - 126 10-71 15-69 12-99 0 .4 - 1.3 Direct Bilirubin 0 .1 BUN 15 Creatinine l.l . -0 . 1 0 . 1 0 0 0 . 2 0 .1 IS 5 9 - 3 3 IS .1.1 0 .2 0 .7 - 1.6 l.l 0 .1 0 .1 0.0 -0 .7 15 4 8-30 l.l 0 .2 0.8-1.7 0 .1 IS 1.4 0 .1 14 1 .0 .05 0 . 0 - 0 . 2 3 8-23 2 .2 0.8-15.0 0 .1 15 1 .0 0 . 1 0 . 1 0 .0 - 0 . 6 IS 5 6 - 2 6 l.l 0 .2 0.8-1.4 Glucose 97 91 19 75-184 93 93 1 0 75-113 99 93 39 74-381 92 90 1 2 72-129 1 Mean ia significantly different (P < .05, Oonferroni (Dunn) I test) from lire mean of the 1" quartile *Mean is significantly different (P < .05, Bonfernuii (Dunn) t lest) bom the mean of the 2"*quartile ' Mean Is significantly different (P < .05. Bonferroni (Dunn) I test) from lire mean of the 3" 1 quartile 4 Mean ia significantly different (P < .05, Bonferroni (Dunn) t test) from (lie mean of the 41*quartile Table 14 Decalur Male Production Employee (N = 161) Thyroid Results* by Quartile of Serum PFOS Distribution** i ompany Page 43 of 121 TSH T4 PreeT4 T3 THBR FTI Quartile I (N 40)_______ _______ Quartile 2 (N = 40)_______ Mean Median SD Range Mean Median SD Range 4.5 2.4 10.4 0.5-65.3 2.4 1.8 2.9 0.2-18.8 7.9 8.2 1.3, 4.6-10.7 8.5 8.5 1.5 3.3-11.4 1.0 1.0 0.1 0.6- 1.3 1.1 l.l 0.2 0.4-1.4 122 118 19 96-186 124 122 19 93-196 31 31 3 24-38 30 30 2 26-37 2.4 2.4 0.3 1.2-3.0 2 5 2.5 0.5 1.0-3.4 _______ Quartile 3 ( N g 41)_______ Mean Median SD Range 2.4 2.1 - 1.5 0.8-8.6 8.5 8.2 1.7 4.7-12.9 1.1 1.1 0.2 0.7-1.5 127 119 24 87-172 31 31 2.6 2.5 ,3 05 26-37 1.5-4.1 ________Quartile 4 (N s 40) Mean Median SD Range 3.0 2.4 3.4 0.8-21.5 8.5 8.4 1.2 5.1-11.4 1.1 1.0 0.1 0.8-1.3 135 136 23 97-190 30 30 3 25-38 2 5 24 .. 0.4 1.9-3.4 *No significantly different (P < .OS, Bonferroni (Dunn) t teat) mean values **See Table 13 for aenun PPOS quartile distribution Table 15 Decatur Male Production Employee (N = 161) Hematology Results* by Quartile of Serum PFOS Distribution** . . company Page 44 o f 121 HCT HOB RBC WBC Platelets Quartile 1 (N = 40) Mean Median SD Range 45 45 2.7 39-51 15.2 15.3 0.9 1 3 .3 - 17.2 4.9 5.0 0.3 4 .0 -5 .5 6.1 6 . 0 1.3 4.3 -1 0 .2 206 2 0 0 45 1 2 6 -3 3 2 Quartile 2 (N = 40) Mean Median SD Range 45 45 2 . 2 40-50 IS.l 15.2 0 . 8 13.4-17.3 S. 0 5.0 0.3 4 .1 - 5 .6 l 6.2 5.9 1 .6 3.3 -1 0 .2 224 2 2 2 42 146-353 Quartile 3 (N = 41) Mean Median SD Range 45 45 2.9 38-52 15.2 15.1 1 .0 12.1 -1 7 .5 5.2 5.0 1 .8 4 .1 - 1 6 .0 6.4 5.9 1.8 4 .1 -1 1 .6 223 2 2 0 47 122 - 328 Quartile 4 (N = 40) Mean Median SD Range 45 45 2.4 39-50 15.2 15.1 0 . 8 1 2 .9 - 16.6 5.0 5.0 . 0.4 3 .8 -5 .9 6.5 6.3 1 .8 3 .8 -1 3 .5 216 213 46 132 - 307 *No significantly different (P < .05, Bonferroni (Dunn) t test) mean values **See Table 13 for serum PFOS quartile distribution Table 16 Decatur Male Production Employee (N = 161) Urinalysis Results by Quartile of Serum PFOS Distribution* 3M Company Page 45 o f 121 Albumin Blood Sugar Quartile 1 N (% ) 1(3) 3(8) 3(8) Quartile 2 N (%) 2(6) 4(10) 1(3) Quartile 3 N (%) 1(3) 4(10) 2(1.2) Quartile N(%) 1(3) 1(3) 0(0) Number of Employees: Q1 = 40; Q2 = 40; Q3 =41; Q4 = 40 *See Table 13 for serum PFOS quartile distribution Table 17 Decatur Male Non-Production Employee (N = 54) Clinical Chemistry Results by Quartile of Serum PFOS Distribution pros Quartile 1IN 13) Mean Median SD Range 0.I9M 0 . 2 0 0.08 0.06-0.29 Quartile 2 (N = 14) Mean Median SD Range 0.394 0.39 0.06 0.32-0.49 Quartile 3 ( N - 14) Mean Median SD Range 0.7 l U 4 0.70 0.16 0.50-0.98 PFOA 0.344 0 .2 1 0.S4 0.04-2.10 0.344 0.30 0.15 0.16-0.61 0.544 0.48 0.28 0.19-1.25 TOP 0.4214 0.37 0.46 0.08-1.90 0.644 0.60 0 .2 1 0.40-1.12 : 0.98'4 0.96 0.24 0.64-1.39 Age 42 44 1 0 2 7 -5 9 42 36 13 2 8 -6 0 48 SI 8 30-56 BMI 29.5 27.4 6 . 0 22.7-40.8 26.3 25.5 4.0 21.7-35.4 29.1 28.7 3.4 25.5 - 37.3 Veart Worked 15.1 18.7 11.9 0.8-37.9 19.6 17.3 13.8 '2.2-38.5 24.3 28.6 1 1 .6 2.3-34.2 Cigarettea/day 5 0 13 0 - 4 0 Drinkt/day 0 .2 0 0.3 0 - 0 . 8 5 0 11 0-40 0.3 0 0.7 0 - 2 . 0 20 0 .2 0 8 0-30 6.5 0 - 1 .6 Choletteroi 207 199 45 158 - 305 204 192 42 153-278 203 197 48 144 - 281 HDL 46 40 14 3 2 -8 2 49 46 14 3 5 -8 0 43 40 8 34-59 Triglyceride! 157 185 63 38-254 129 96 64 59 - 241 161 154 65 62-284 Aik Phot 59 61 15 2 6 -7 9 62 62 17 3 9 -9 8 72 72 15 48-105 GOT 22 21 8 11-35 36 25 29 13-119 29 29 8 15-41 AST 25 2 2 7 16-42 28 27 1 0 16-48 27 25 6 16-39 ALT 28 23 16 15-74 33 32 2 0 14-91 35 33 1 2 24-66 Total Bilirubin 0 .8 0 .8 0 .2 0.5-1.0 0 . 8 0 . 8 0 . 2 0 .5 -1 .0 * 0 . 8 0.7 0 J 0.4-1.4 Direct Bilirubin 0 .1 0 .1 0.07 0 .0 - 0 . 2 0 .1 0 .1 0.03 0 .1 - 0 .2 0.1 0 .1 0.06 0 .0 - 0 . 2 BUN 14 13 3 8 - 2 2 14 14 3 10-18 15 15 5 8-24 Creatinine Olucoae 1 .0 1 .0 0 .1 0.9-1.2 8 8 89 8 7 6 -9 9 1 .0 l.l 0 .1 0 .8 - l.l t 89 89 6 '7 9 -1 0 0 l.l l.l 0 .2 0.7-1.4 94 92 1 0 70-112 1 Mean It tifnlficanlly different (P < .05, Bonferroni (Dunn) t test) from the mean of die 1" quartile 1 Mean it significantly different (P < .05, Bonferroni (Dunn) I lest) from the mean of the 2"' quartile ' Mean It tigniflcanlly different (P < .05, Bonferroni (Dunn) t test) from the mean of the 3*1 quartile *"* n w .m n ! rrtunnl t test) from the mean of the 4 tflquartile Company Page 46 o f 121 Mean 1 .6 6 IA* Quartile 4 (N 13) Median SD Range 1.19 0.73 1.00-2.95 1.I7,a * 1.07 0.60 0.35-2.05 2 29>>2** 1 .8 8 0.91 1.13-3.74 49 51 6 3 5 -5 6 28.7 29.4 2.3 24-32 27.8' 31.8 8 .6 4.5-35.4 8 0 IS 0 - 4 0 -0 . 1 0 0 . 2 0 0 . 8 2 2 2 233 42 159 - 297 43 42 1 2 24-73 232 1 2 2 173 69 - 512 75 73 15 52-104 29 23 2 2 9-89 2 2 23 5 1 4 -2 9 28 27 6 20-41 0 .8 0 .8 0 .2 0 .4 - l.l 0 .1 0 .1 0.07 0.1-0.3 16 414 1 2 - 2 2 l.l l.l 0.1 1.0-1.3 103 91 26 83-166 Table 18 Decatur Male Non-Production Employee (N = 54) Thyroid Results by Quartile of Serum PPOS Distribution** Company Page 47 o f 121 TSH T4 FreeT4 T3 THBR FTI Quartile t (N - i l l ________ Mean Median SD Range 2 -1 1 .8 9.1 9.1 1 .0 0.8-4.2 1 .2 6.9 -1 0 .9 l .l 1 .1 0 . 1 0.1 - 1.3 124 129 17 9 9 - 1 5 0 30 30 2 29-34 2.7 2 . 8 0.4 2 .0 -3 .4 Quartile 2 (N = 14) Mean Median SD Range 2 .1 1.9 1.3 0 .0 3 -5 .2 8 . 2 7.9 1 .6 6.2 -1 0 .7 1.1 1.1 0 .1 0 .9 -1 .3 1 2 0 1 1 2 23 94-180 31 31 3 25-35 2.4 2 . 6 0.4 1 .8 -3 .2 Ouaitilc 3 ( N 14) Mean Median SD Range 3.0 2 . 0 . 2.7 1 .6 - 1 1 . 8 8 .0 8 .2 1.3 6.3 - 10.2 1 .0 1.1 0 . 1 0 .8 - 1 . 2 117 114 23 86-164 31 31 . 3 2.4 2.5 0.5 26-35 1.7-3.1 Quartile'4 (N = 13) Mean Median SD Range 1 .6 1.5 0.9 0 .4 - 3 .6 8.7 8.7 1 .2 7 .0 - 1 0 .9 1 .2 1.2 0 .1 0.9 -1 .4 118 1 2 1 13 91 - 1 3 6 30 31 3 2 5 - 3 6 2 . 6 2.5 0.4 2 .0 - 3 .2 No significantly different (P < .05, Bonferroni (Dunn) t test) mean values **See Table 17 for serum PPOS quartile distribution Table 19 Decatur Male Non-Production Employee (N = 54) Hematology Results41by Quartile of Senim PFOS Distribution*41 ..... Company Page 48 of 121 .u Z II HCT HOB RBC WBC Platelets Quartile 1(N = !3) Mean Median SD Range 45 45 3 38-51 15.2 15.4 1.2 12.0- 16.9 5.0 5.0 0.3 4 7 -5 .5 6.1 5.7 2.2 4.1-13.1 245 223 62 134-337 Quartile 2 (N = 14) Mean Median SI) Range 45 45 3 41-53 15.4 15.0 l.l 14.2-17.8 5.6 4.9 2.8 4.5-15.1 6.0 6.1 1.6 3.0-8.2 219 217 30 172-266 Quartile 3 (N 14) Mean Median SD Range 44 45 3 41-49 14.9 15.0 0.8 13.6- 16.7 4.8 4.8 0.3 4.3-5.3 6.0 5.7 1.1 4.4-8.6 230 206 58 149- 361 Quartile 13) Mean Median SD Range 45 45 1 43-49 15.0 15.1 0.5 14.0- 16.0 5.1 5.1 0.3 4.6-5.5 6.4 6.0 1.6 4.4-9.8 212 203 34 167 - 258 No significantly different (P < .05, Bonferroni (Dunn) t test) mean values S ee Table 17 for serum PFOS quartile distribution Table 20 Decatur Male Non-Production Employee (N = 54) Urinalysis Results by Quartile of Serum PFOS Distribution* 3M Compan; Page 49 o f 12 Albumin Blood Sugar Quartile 1 N (%) 0(0) 2(15) 0(0) Quartile 2 N (%) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) Quartile 3 N (%) 0(0) 2(15) 0(0) Quartile 4 N (%) 1(8) 0(0) 0(0) Number of Employees: Q1 = 13; Q2 = 14; Q3 = 14; Q4 = 13 See Table 17 for serum PFOS quartile distribution Table 2 1 Decatur Female Production and Non-Production Employee (N = 48) Clinical Chemistry Results by Quartile of Serum PFOS Distribution .A Company rag e 50 of 121 PFOS PFOA TOF Age BMI Mean 0 .2 0 3,4 Quartile 1 (N = 12) Median SI) Range 0 . 2 0 0.08 0.06-0.31 0.40m 0.28 0.47 0.08-1.81 0.48m 0.34 0.38 0.21-1.60 56 36 8 2 5 -4 7 27.5 27.4 6 .8 21.5-45.3 Quartile 2 (N = 1 2 ) Mean Median s i r Range 0.49m 0.50 0.13 0.32-0.70 0.78m 0.60 0.92 0.10-3.50 I.02-* 0.94 0.72 0.33-3.02 43 43 II 26-58 25.9 25.5 5.4 20.0-39.3 Quartile 3 (N = 12) Mean Median SD Range 0.99,2< 0.92 0.16 0.77-1.30 l.77,J 1.28 1.17 0.25-4.00 2.14M 1.83 0 .8 8 0.86-3.54 44 43 6 32-50 27.5 28.2 4.5 20.3-33.6 Mean 2.04 Quartile 4 (N = 12) Median SD Range 1.80 0.78 1.38-3.62 l.98u 3 3 9 U.) 1.54 2.76 1.27 0.85-5.41 1.65 1.99-7.81 44 46 7 30 -5 2 29.9 27.8 6 .8 21.0-41.5 Years Waited II Cigarettcs/day 2 Drinks/day 0 .0 Cholesterol 184 HDL 55 Triglycerides 96 AlkPhos 59 GOT 14 AST 22 ALT 20 Total Bilirubin 0 . 6 Direct Bilirubin 0 .1 BUN 12 Creatinine 0 .8 Glucose 89 7 0 0 170 56 100 61 15 21 16 0 .6 0 .1 13 0 .8 90 10 ' 2-27 5 0-15 0 .1 0.0-0.3 40 138-266 II 3 3 -6 9 49 24-198 16 27-81 6 6-26 8 13-43 13 9 -5 8 0 .2 0.2-0.9 0 . 1 0 .0 - 0 . 2 4 5-20 0 . 2 0 .6 - l.l 15 7 3 - 125 14 13 30 0.1 0 .0 202 210 60 58 109 89 63 S8 14 13 18 18 18 17 0 .6 0 .6 0.1 0 .1 1 2 13 0.8 0 .8 86 . 86 II 9 0 .2 31 12 58 19 6 5 7 0 .2 0.05 3 0 .1 9 2-27 0-30 0 .0 - 1 .0 139 - 262 40-81 41-233 34-91 7-30 11-26 11-36 0 .3 -1.0 0 .0 - 0 .1 8-17 0.7- 1.2 72-110 12 4 0 .0 206 66 186 68 28 21 22 0 .6 0 .1 13 0.9 82 6 0 0 200 66 94 69 17 19 17 0.5 0 .1 13 0.9 85 10 9 0 .1 43 12 281 22 27 9 12 0 .1 0.04 4 0 .2 8 4-32 0-30 0 .0 - 0 .1 161-313 50-91 4 2 - 1049 41-100 10-97 7-39 6-47 0 .4 -0.8 0 .0 - 0 . 1 6-23 0 .6 - 1 .2 67-90 15 13 0 .1 209 55 142 70 16 18 17 0.5 0 .1 12 0.9 92 17 1 0 3-32 5 15 0-40 0 . 0 0 .1 0.0 -0 .3 206 42 129-287 55 1 2 36-78 113 94 46 - 394 70 15 4 4 -9 5 13 9 6 -3 9 17 5 11-30 14 6 10-29 0U> 1 0.5 0 .1 0 .1 0.05 0 .0 - 0 .1 13 5 1-1 8 0 . 8 . 01 89 13 0 .7 - 1.1 78-123 'Number of Female employees by proiiuciioii category by quartile Qi __Q2 Q* . Q4 Production 31 11 0 n 2 (0 1 Mean is significantly different (P < .05. Bonferroni (Dunn) I test) from the mean of the I" quartile 1Mean is significantly different (P < .05, Bimfcrmm (Dunn) t lest) from the mean of the 7 * quartile ' Mean is significantly different (P < .05, Uonlcrruni (Dunn) t lest) from the mean of (lie 3" 1quartile 4 Mean is significantly different (P < .05, Bonfcrruni (Dunn) t test) from the mean of the 4,hquartile Table 22 Decatur Female Production and Non-Production Employee (N = 48) Thyroid Results* by Quartile of Serum PFOS Distribution** A Company Page SI o f 121 TSH T4 FreeT4 T3 THBR FT! Quartile t (N = 12) Meun Median SD Range ________ Quartile 2 (N = 12)________ ________ Quartile 3 )N = 12)_________ _________ Quartile 4 (N = 12) Mean Median SD Ranee Mean Median SD Ranee Mean Median SD Ranee 2 .0 2 .0 1.3 0 .0 3 -4 .8 2 . 6 2 . 2 1.3 0 .7 - 4 .6 .2.4 2 . 1 1 .2 1.0-5.2 2 .2 2 .2 0 .6 1.4-3.6 1 0 . 0 9.8 2.7 6 .5 -1 5 .1 9.0 8.9 2 . 0 5 .8 -1 2 .2 9.2 8.9 1.7 6 .7 -1 1 .9 9.1 8.4 2.5 5.8 - 14.2 1 .0 1.1 u .r 0 .9 -1 .3 1.1 1 .0 0 .1 0 .9 -1 .3 1 .0 1 .0 0 .1 0 . 7 - 1.1 . -1 . 0 1 . 0 0 . 1 0 8 1 . 2 132 126 26 1 0 2 -1 8 8 127 1 2 0 29 86-176 126 119 26 91 - 168 127 1 2 2 32 8 6 - 1 9 6 28 29 3 24-34 28 28 3 23-36 26 26 4 22-32 28 28 4 1 8 -3 2 2.7 2.7 0 . 6 1 .7 -3 .8 2.5 2.5 0.5 1 .7 -3 .1 2.3 2.4 0.4 1 .6 -2 .7 2.4 2.4 0.4 1 .8 -3 .0 N o significantly different (P < .OS, Uonferroni (Dunn) t test) mean values S ee Table 21 for serum PFOS quartile distribution Table 23 Decatur Female Production and Non-Production Employee (N = 48) Hematology Results by Quartile of Serum PFOS Distribution* ,1 Company Page 52 of 121 HCT HOB RBC WBC Platelets Quartile 1 (N = 12)________ ________ Quartile 2 (N = 12)________ ________ Quartile 3 (N = 12)_________ _________ Quartile 4 (N = 12) M am__Median SD Range______ Mean Median SD Range_______ Mean Median SD Range_______ Mean Median SD Range 38 38 3 .31 - 4 3 40 40 2 36-43 39 39 1 3 6 - 4 1 40 40 4 3 4 -4 9 1 2 . 6 12.7 1.2 9.9-14.4 13.3 13.3 0 . 6 12.3-14.5 12.9 1 2 . 8 0.5 1 2 .0 -1 3 .8 13.4 13.4 1.4 1 1 .3 -1 6 .2 4.3 4.3 0.3 3 .8 -4 .8 4.3 4.3 0.3 3 .7 -4 .8 4.4 4.3 0.3 3 .9 -5 .0 4.3 4.4 0.4 3 .9 - 5 .0 6.7 6.3 2 . 0 4 .2 -1 1 .7 6 . 6 6.5 1.9 4.3 -1 0 .4 5.9 6 . 2 1.7 2.8 - 8.4 7.6 7.5 1.9 4.2 - 10.4 2801 260 6 8 2 1 2 -4 5 0 228 216 42 185-302 209* 206 34 147 - 272 258 254 55 159 - 339 *See Table 21 lor serum PFOS quartile distribution 1 Mean is significantly different (P < .05, Bonfcrroni (Dunn) t lest) from the mean of the 1" quartile 1 Mean is significantly different (P < .05, Bonfcrroni (Dunn) t lest) from the mean of the 2*dquartile 1 Mean is significantly different (P < .05, Bonfenoni (Dunn) t test) from the mean of the 3"1 quartile 4 Mean is significantly different (P < .05, Bonferroni (Dunn) t test) from the mean of the 4* quartile Table 24 Decatur Female Production and Non-Production Employee (N = 48) Urinalysis Results by Quartile of Serum PFOS Distribution* 3M Company P is e 53 o f 121 Albumin Blood Sugar Quartile 1 N (%) 0(0) 2(17) 0(0) Quartile 2 N (%) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) Quartile 3 N (%) 2(17) 3(25) 0(0) Quartile 4 N (%) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) . Number of Employees: Q1 = 12; Q2 = 12; Q3 = 12; Q4 = 12 See Table 21 for serum PFOS quartile distribution Table 25 . 0c 54 of 121 Number of Participants (Percent in Parenthesis) Stratified by Antwerp or Decatur Employee Populations Who Had Above Reference Range Values for Hepatic Clinical Chemistry Tests by Quartile of Serum PFOS Distribution AotWEID Altalme Hinailanuc Q2 Q3 - 0 * Male Production' 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) Male Non-Production1 0 (0 ) 0 (0 ) 0 (0 ) 0 (0 ) Female Production1 and Nan-Productiun 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) AST ____ Q L _ - Q 2 Q3 1(3) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) o<o) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) 04 0(0) K7) 0(0) ALT 01 02 03 04 1(3) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) 1(8) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) GGT 01 02 03 04 1(3) 1(7) 0(0) 1(3) 1(8) 0(0) 2(5) 4(11) 2(13) 1(7) 0(0) 0(0) 0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 3(8) 2 04) 0(0) 5 03) 2(15) 1 (8) 401) 3(20) 0(0) 5 04) 1 (8) 0 (0) nw lnr Male Production' M3) Male Non-fVoduction1 0 (0 ) Female Production1 and Non-Production 0(0) 2(6) 0(0) 0(0) 2(6) 0(0) 0(0) 1(3) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) 1(3) 0(0) 0(0) 2(14) 0(0) 1(8) 0(0) 0(0) 4(10) 0(0) 0(0) 3(8) 1(8) 1(8) 5(13) 1(7) 0(0) 3 (8 ) 11 (28) 2(14) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) 4(10) 0(0) 0(0) 3(8) 2(6) 6 0 5 ) 3(21) 0(0) 1(8) 0(0) 2(17) 0(0) 7(18) 1 (8) 1(8) 8(20) 5(36) 0(0) 7(18) 204) 207) 14 (35) 1(8) 0(0) 'Include Alleatine Phosphale, AST, ALT, GGT, Tolal and Diiect Bilinibin See Table 4 for serum PFOS quartile distrbuiion j See Table 7 for serum PFOS quartile distrbuiion *See Table IO for serum PFOS quartile distrbuiion See Table 13 for serum PFOS quartile distrbuiion See Table 17 for senim PFOS quartile distrbuiion See Table 21 for serum PFOS quartile distrbuiion Table 26 Antwerp and Decalur Male Production and Non-Production41(N = 421) Fluorochemical, Demographic and Clinical Chemistry Results by Quartile of Serum PFOS Distribution ' jjvi Company Page 55 o N 2 l Quartile I (N 105)________ Mean Median SI) Kanne PPOS 0.27*-1,4 0.29 0 .1 1 0.04-0.42 PFOA 0.54,w 0.25 0.77 0.01-4.03 TOP 0.621M 0.43 0.58 0.05-3.03 Age 38* 36 1 0 2 3 -6 0 BMI 23.8 25.1 4.0 19.2-40.8 Years Worked I21 II 1 0 1-38 Cigaretles/day 4 0 9 0-40 Drinks/day 0.91'4 0.7 1 .0 0 - 5 Cholesterol 214. 209 41 140-331 HDL 34 53 15 31-121 Triglycerides I3I4 104 95 32-527 Aik Plus 6 lM 62 16 2 6 -9 8 GOT 24 2 0 16 7 - III AST 25 24 8 13-58 ALT 264 23 13 10-91 Total Bilirubin l.0 M 0.9 0.3 0 .5 - 2 . 0 Direct Bilirubin 0 .1 0 .1 0.1 0.0-0.3 BUN 18 17 7 8 -7 1 Creatinine 1 .2 1.1 0.5 0.8 -5 .8 Glucose 87 89 16 31-131 _________Quartile 2 (N = IQS)_________ ________ Quartile 3 (N = 106)_________ Mean Median SU Range Mean Median SD Range 0.601'1'4 0.59 0 .1 2 0.43-0.81 1.19,A4 1.17 0.24 0.82-1.68 1.2 ! 1* 0 .8 6 1.19 0.06-7.04 I.451,4 1 .2 0 1 .1 0 0.12-7.48 l.40'J "4 1.14 0.89 0.38-5.69 2 .I2 ,A 4 1 .8 8 0.87 0.98-6.61 41 40 1 0 21-63 42' 43 9 22-61 26.9 26.3 4.0 19.0-37.3 27.3 26.7 4.5 17.2-50.1 15 II 1 2 2-38 I6 1 16 11 1-38 5 0 10 0-40 60 10 0-40 0 .6 0.3 0.9 0 -4 0.5' 0 .1 0.9 0 -6 214 217 43 121-308 215 216 39 105 - 303 47 45 II 2 9 -8 0 48 46 13 24-100 155 130 1 0 2 35-633 169 134 123 32 - 731 67 6 6 18 30-142 69' 67 2 1 30-160 29 2 2 2 2 7 -1 4 4 26 23 15 6 -8 9 25 24 6 16-49 24 24 7 7-51 28 26 II 10-63 28 26 14 6-103 0.9 0 . 8 0.3 0 . 3 - 2 . 0 0 .8 1 0 .8 0.3- 0 .4 - 2 . 0 0 .1 0.1 0 .1 0.0-0.7 0 .1 0 .1 0 .1 0.0-0.3 17 17 4 9-30 17 16 5 8-31 1.1 l.l 0 .2 0.7-1.7 1.3 l.l 1.4 0.8-15.0 91 90 17 ^9-184 91 91 17 45-168 _________ Quartile 4 (N = 105) Mean Median SD Range 2.69,A 2.46 1.09 1.69-10.06 2.70'14 2.43 1.63 0.25- 12.70 4.4l , u 4.06 1.72 1.92-12.23 40 40 9 2 7 -6 0 27.2 26.8 4.5 17.8-45.5 15 15 1 0 2-38 6 0 10 0-40 0.5' 0 . 0 0.9 0 - 5 2 2 2 214 44 122-384 48 45 IS 2 6 - 119 177' 155 123 39-796 70* 67 19 2 1 - 126 30 25 17 7-85 25 24 . 9 13-69 33' 29 19 8 -9 9 0 .8 ' 0.7 0.3 0 . 4 - 2 .2 . -0 . 1 0 . 1 0 .1 0 0 0 . 6 17 16 5 6 - 3 0 l.l 1 .0 0 .2 0.8-1.5 91 89 30 40-331 Table 26 (continued) j M Company Page 56 of 121 Number o f male employees by locution, production category and <|uarlile (|>ercenl in parenthesis) ___________________ Quartile I________________________ Quartile 2___________ ___________ Quartile 3___________ Production Non-Production Production Non-I'rodoclion Production Non-Production Antwerp 38 38 38 12 38 4 Decatur 7 22 40 15 51 13 Total 45 (43) 60 (37) 78 (74) 27 (26) 80 (84) 27 (16) ___________ Quartile 4 Production Non-Production 36 2 63 4 99 (94) 6 (6 ) 1 Mean is significantly different (P < .05, Bonferroni (Dunn) t test) from the mean of the I" quaitile 1 Mean is significantly different (P < .03, Bonfenoni (Dunn) t lest) from the mean of the 2 " 1quurtile 1Mean is significantly different (P < .03, Bonfenoni (Dunn) t test) from the mean of tltc 3"1 quurtile * Mean is significantly different (P < .03, Bonfcironi (Dunn) l test) from Hie mean of the 4lkquurtile Table 27 Antwerp and Decatur Male Production and Non-Production Employee (N = 421) Thyroid Results by Quartile of Serum PFOS Distribution* A Company Page 57 of 121 TSH T4 FreeT4 T3 THBR FTI Quartite 1 (N 105)_______ ________Quarlile 2 (N = IQS) Mean Median SI) Range Mean Median SI) Range 2 . 0 1.9 1 .2 0.03 - 5.7 3.1 2 . 0 6 . 6 0 .5 -6 5 .3 8.3 8.5 1.4 5 .0 -1 1 .5 8 . 2 8.4 1.4 4 .2 - 1 2 .0 1 .1 1 .1 0 . 2 0 . 9 - 1.5 1.1 1.1 0 .1 0 .6 -1 .4 I244 123 17 9 4 -1 6 4 128 127 2 0 86-186 33w 33 3 2 6 - 4 2 32 33 3 2 4 - 4 1 2.7 2.7 0.5 1 .7 -4 .2 2 . 6 2.5 0.4 1 .2 -4 .0 ________Quartile 3 (N = 106)________ ________ Quartile 4 (N = IQS) Mean Median SD Range Mean Median S D Range . 2 . 1 1.7 2 . 0 0 .2 -1 8 .8 2.5 1.9 2 . 8 0 .5 -2 1 .5 8.3 8 . 2 1.5 3 .3 -1 2 .9 8.4 8 . 2 1.4 4 .7 -1 1 .4 1.1 1.1 0 .2 0 .4 - 1.6 . -1 .1 1 . 2 0 . 2 0 8 1 . 6 127 126 2 1 91 - 1 9 6 132' 131 22 87-190 32' 32 3 25-43 32' 32 3 25-41 2 .6 2 .6 0.5 1 .0 -4 .1 2 . 6 2 . 6 0.4 1 .6 -3 .6 *See Table 26 for serum PFOS distribution 1 Mean is lignifibanlly different (P < .OS, Bunferroni (Dunn) t test) from the mean of the 1" quartile 1 Mean is significantly different (P< .OS, Bonferroni (Dunn) t lest) from the mean of the 2lai quartile 1 Mean is significantly different (P < .OS, Bonferroni (Dunn) t test) from the mean of the 3"*quartile 4 Mean is significantly different (P < .OS, Bonferroni (Dunn) t test) from the mean of the 4* quartile Tabic 28 Antwerp and Decatur Female Production and Non-Production (N = 97) Pluorochemical, Demographic and Clinical Chemistry Results by Quartile of Serum PFOS Distribution Company Page 58 o f 121 Quartile I (N 24) Mean Median SD Ranne Quartile 2 (N = 24) Mean Median SD Range PFOS 0.071-4 0.08 0 .0 2 0.04-0.10 0.134 0.13 0.03 0.10-0.19 PFOA 0.041,4 0 .0 2 0.04 0.01 -0.23 0.074 0.05 0.07 0.02-0.34 TOP 0.091-4 0.09 Q.04 0.0S-0.26 0.I71-4 0.14 0.07 0.09-0.35 Age 344 34 9 24-52 374 36 7 25-52 BMI 2 2 .8 4 23.4 2.7 18.4-28.3 23.9* 2 2 .2 4.3 17.3-32.3 Yean Worked It 9 8 1 -2 9 IS 14 7 3-29 Cigarettet/day ' I4 Drinki/day 0.44 Choleaterol 207. 0 0.3 203 4 0 -2 0 24 0.4 0 - 1 0.44 39 132-274 203 05 0.3 0.4 198 39 0-15 0 -1 138-302 HDL Triglyceride* AlkPho* OOT 66 93 504 II4 61 16 46-121 65 64 16 90 48 26 - 248 91 8 8 41 52 16 22-81 441 '4 44 11 1 0 7 2 - 3 2 13 1 0 8 33-104 24-172 20-65 5-41 AST 19 ALT 13 Total Bilirubin 0 .8 W 19 12 0 .8 5 11-31 5 8-35 0 .2 0 .5 - 1.2 18 16 0 .8 3 4 16 13 0 .8 7 II 0.3 9-43 6-58 0.2-1.7 Direct Bilirubin 0 .1 BUN 14 Creatinine 0.9 0 .1 0.1 0.0-0.4 0 .1 0 .1 0 .1 0 .0 - 0 . 2 13 3 9 -2 3 16 16 4 7-22 0.9 0 .2 0.6- 1.3 1 .0 1.0 0 .2 0.7-1.4 Otucose Quartile 3 (N = 25) Mean Median SD Range 0.39* 0.37 0.15 0.20-0.70 : 0.61' 0.36 0.74 0.04-3.50 0.80,A4 0.59 0.61 0.21-3.02 39 38 9 25-58 25.5 23.6 6 .1 18.3-45.3 12 10 9 2-27 20 7 . 0-30 0.3 0 0.4 0 - 2 2 0 0 2 0 0 32 139 - 271 63 61 IS 38-104 107 91 53 32 - 233 59* 56 16 32-91 14 1 2 6 7-30 19 19 5 11-33 16 15 6 7-36 0 .6 '- 2 0 .6 0 .2 0.3-1.0 0.1 0.1 0 . 1 0 .0 - 0 . 2 14 14 4 5-23 0.9 0 . 8 0 .1 0.7-1.2 Quartile 4 (N =24) Mean Median SD Range LSI'** 1.34 0.76 0.77-3.62 I.8 8 1* 3 1.39 2 7 7 U.J 2 .6 6 44>.r 45 1 .2 0 0.25-5.41 1.44 0.86-7.81 6 30-52 28.7U 27.8 5.7 20.3-41.5 14 12 10 3-32 s '-2 0 13 0 - 4 0 o'-2 0 0.1 0 - 1 208 2 0 2 42 129-313 60 58 13 36-91 164 104 206 42 - 1049 69,J 70 18 4 1 -100 2 2 ' 14 2 1 6 - 9 7 19 18 7 7 -3 9 19 0.5' 2 16 1 0 0.5 0 .1 6-47 0 .3 -0.8 0 .1 0 .1 0.04 0 .0 - 0 . 1 13 13 5 1-23 0.9 0 . 8 0 . 2 0 .6 - 1 .2 67-123 Table 28 (continued) _iv1 Company Page 59 of 121 Number of female employees by locution, production category and quarlile (percent in parenthesis) ___________________ Quartile I___________ ___________ Quartile 2___________ ____________Quartile 3____________ ___________ Quartile 4 Production Non-Production Production Non-I'roduclion Production Non-Production Production Non-Production Antwerp 3 20 2 17 16 00 Decatur Total 0 3(12) ' 2 1 (8 8 ) 1 3(12) 4 2 1 (8 8 ) 7 8 (32). II 17(68) 22 22 (92) 2 2 (8 ) 1Mean is significantly different (P < .05, Bonfcmmi (Dunn) t lest) from the mean ofihe I- quarlile *Mean is significantly different (P < .05, Bonferroni (Dunn) I test) from the mean of the 2 " 1quarlile 1 Mean is significantly different (P < .05, Bonferroni (Dunn) t test) from lire mean of die 3*1quarlile 4 Mean is significantly different (P < .05, Uonferroni (Dunn) I lest) from the mean of (lie d* quarlile Table 29 Antwerp and Decatur Female Production and Non-Production Employee (N = 97) Thyroid Results* by Quartile of Serum PFOS Distribution** 1Company Page 60 of 121 TSH T4 FreeT4 T3 THBR FT! Quartile 1____________ ____________ Quartile 2____________ ____________ Quartile 3_____________ _____________ Quartile 4 i ae Mean Median SD Mean Median SI) Range Mean Median SD Range Mean Median SD Range 2 . 2 2 . 2 1 .2 0.03 - 4.9 2 . 2 2 . 0 1.5 0 .0 3 -6 .7 , 2.5 2 .1 1.4 0 .7 - 6 .5 2.3 2 . 2 1 . 0 1 .0 - 5 .2 1 0 .2 1 0 .2 l.l l.l 2 .0 6.6-13.8 > 0 .1 0.8-1.3 9.8 9.8 3.1 4 .6 - 18.3 1 .2 l.l 0.7 0 .7 - 4 .6 9.9 9.5 l.l l.l 2.3 5 .8 -1 5 .1 0 .1 0.9-1.3 9.1 8.7 . 2 .1 5.8 - 1 4 .2 1 .0 1 .0 0 .1 0 .7 - 1 .2 145 147 28 9 8 -1 9 1 147 139 53 81 - 3 4 5 133 129 31 8 6 -2 2 8 127 1 2 0 28 8 6 - 196 29 29 4 19-36 31 32 6 22-46 28 27 .3 23-36 27 27 4 1 8 -3 2 2.9 2.9 0.5 2 .1 - 3 .6 3.0 2 . 8 1.3 1 .7 -8 .4 2.7 2.7 0.5 1 .7 -3 .8 2.4 2.4 0.4 1 .6 -3 .0 *No significantly different (P < .05, Bonfemoni (Dunn) t test) mean'values **See Table 28 for serum PFOS quartile distribution Tabic 30 Number of Participants (Percent in Parenthesis) by Employee Population Which Had Above Reference Range Values for Hepatic Clinical Chemistry Tests by Quartile of Serum PPOS Distribution A a Company Page 61 of 121 Antwerp A Decatur Mala fliaplnyeea Production and*1 Non-Production Alkaline Phoapliamc 0 Q2 Q3 04 0 (0) 1(11 3(3) 2(2) Pcoale Employcci Production and* Noa-Productian 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) '__________AST____________ Ql 02 03 04 3(3) 1( 1) I d ) 4(4) _____________ ACT_____________ Ol 02 03 04 t 4(4) 4(4) 7(7) 13( 12) ' '_______ GOT_____________ _________Total Liver Panel* 01 02 03 04 01 02 03 04 . 6(6) 8(8) 6(6) 12(12) 15( 14) 17( 16) 17( 16) 24(23) *' 0 (0) 1(4) 0(0) 0(0) 0 (0) 1(4) 0(0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 2(8) 0 (0) 2(8) 0 (0) 2(H) 'Include Alkaline Phosphatase, AST, ALT, OOT, Total and Direct Bilirubin 1SeeTable26 for tenun PPOSquartiledistribution 1SeeTable 28 for rerunPPOSquartiledistribution Intercept ' PFOS Production Job (yes/no) Anlwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked R2 = .08 Adj R2 = .06 ^Natural log Table 31 Multivariable Regression Model of Cholesterol* by PFOS and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program A Company Page 62 of 121 Parameter_________________ SE :___________ p value_______________ Partial R2 5.072 0.081 .0001 - 0.020 , 0.009 .04 <.01 -0.010 0.023 .66 <.01 -0.025 0.025 .31 <.01 0.006 0.002 .0002 .04 0.001 0.002 .62 < .0 l 0.0007 0.001 -.49 <.01 0.035 0.012 .004 .02 -0.002 ' 0.001 .15 <.01 Intercept PFOA Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age . BM1 Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked R2 = .08 Adj R2 = .06 Natural log Table 32 Multivariable Regression Model of Cholesterol41by PFOA and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 5.069 0.015 -0.012 -0.032 0.007 0.001 0.0006 0.03 -0.002 SE 0.080 0.008 0.024 0.025 ` 0.002 0.002 0.001 0.01 0.001 p value .0001 .05 . .63 .22 .0001 .64 .52 .005 .21 Company Page 63 o f 121 Partial R2 <.01 <.01 <.01 .05 <.01 <.01 .02 <.01 Intercept PFOS PFOA Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked RJ = .08 Adj R1 = .06 Natural log Table 33 Multivariable Regression Model of Cholesterol* by PFOS and PFOA and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 3.066 0.015 0.009 -0.018 -0.033 0.007 0.001 0.0007 0.035 -0.002 SE 0.081 0.010 0.008 0.024 0.025 0.002 0.002 0.001 0.013 0.001 p value <.0001 .16 . .26 .46 .20 .0001 .62 .50 .004 . .15 -M Company Page 64 o f 121 Partial R - <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 .05 <.01 <.01 .02 .004 Intercept TOP Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked R2 = .08 Adj R3 = .07 Natural log Tabic 34 Multivariable Regression Model of Cholesterol* by TOP and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 5.065 0.015 -0.018 -0.034 0.007 0.001 0.0006 0.034 -0.002 SE 0.081 0.006 ` 0.024 0.02S 0.002 0.002 0.001 0.012 i 0.001 p value i <.0001 .02 . .45 .18 .0001 .63 .51 .005 .16 A Company Page 65 of 121 Partial R2 - < .0 l <.01 <.01 .05, <.01 < .0 i .02 <.01 Intercept PFOS Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age. BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked R2* .33, Adj R2 = .32 Natural log Table 35 Multivariable Regression Model of HDL* by PFOS and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 4.313 -0.005 0.009 -0.059 0.002 -0.019 -0.004 0.083 -0.001 SE 0.090 0.011 0.026 0.027 0.002 0.003 0.001 0.014 0.002 p value <.0001 .64 . .73 .03 .37 <.0001 .0004 <.0001 .51 . A Company Page 66 o f 121 Partial R2 - .01 <.01 .17 <.01 .07 .01 . .06 <.01 Intercept ' PFOA Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked R2 = .34 Adj R2 = .32 Natural log Table 36 Multivariable Regression Model of HDL* by PFOA and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 4.326 -0.018 0.028 -0.043 0.001 -0.019 -0.004 0.084 -0.001 SE : 0.090 0.009 0.027 0.028 0.002 0.003 0.001 0.014 0.002 p value <.0001 .04 . .30 .13 .50 <.0001 .0004 <.0001 .54 Company Page 67 o f 121 Partial R2 .04 <.01 .14 <.01 .07 .01 .06 <.01 Intercept ' PFOS PFOA Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarelles/day Drinks/day Years Worked R2 = .34 Adj R2 = .32 Natural log Table 37 Multivariable Regression Model of HDL* by PFOS and PFOA and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 4.324 0.006 -0.020 0.025 -0.043 0.001 -0.019 -0.004 0.084 -0.001 SE : 0.090 0.012 0.010 0.271 0.028 0.002 0.003 0.001 0.014 0.002 p value <.0001 .60 . .04 .36 .13 .50 <.0001 .0004 <.0001 .49 : Company Page 68 o f 121 Partial R2 .01 .03 < .0 I .14 <.01 .07 .01 .06 <.01 Intercept . TOP Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age. BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Table 38 Multivariable Regression Model of HDL* by TOP and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 200Q Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 4.322 -0.010 0.022 -0.050 0.001 -0.019 -0.004 0.084 0.0009 SE ; 0.090 0.007 0.027 0.028 : 0.002 0.003 0.001 0.014 0.002 p value <.0001 . .14 .41 .08 .45 <.0001 .0004 <.0001 -.58 *Nwlural Injj i .69 of 121 Partial R2 .03 <.01 .15 <.01 .07 .01 .06 <.01 Intercept PFOS Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age. BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked R2 = .28 Adj R2 = .27 Natural log Table 39 Multivariable Regression Model of Triglycerides* by PFOS and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 2.768 0.066 0.023 0.151 0.013 0.055 0.008 0.033 -0.007 SE 0.224 0.026 0.065 0.068 0.005 0.007 0.003 0.034 0.004 p value i <.0001 .01 . .72 .03 .009 <.0001 .002 .33 .07 . i Company Page 70 of 121 Partial R2 .03 <.01 .10 .02 .10 .02 <.01 <.01 Intercept PFOA Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age. BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked K2 a .29 Adj R* = .27 Natural log Tabic 40 Multivariable Regression Model of Triglycerides4' by PFOA and Ollier Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp und Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 2.742 0.066 -0.004 0.111 0.014 0.055 0.008 0.029 -0.007 i SE 0.224 0.021 0.066 0.070 0.005 0.007 0.003 0.034 0.004 p value <.0001 .002 . .95 .12 .005 <.0001 .003 .15 .11 . .. Company Page 7 l o f 121 Partial Rz .05 <.01 .08 .02 .10 .02 <.01 .005 Intercept ' PFOS PFOA Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked R2 = .29 Adj R2 = .27 Natural log Table 4 1 Multivariable Regression Model of Triglycerides* by PFOS and PFOA and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 2.734 0.037 0.053 -0.021 0.109 0.014 0.055 0.008 0.030 -0.007 SE 0.224 0.029 0.023 0.067 0.070 0.005 0.007 0.003 0.034 0.004 : p value <.0001 .20 . .02 .76 .12 .004 <.0001 .002 .15 .07 Company Page 72 of 121 Partial R2 .03 .02 <.01 .08 .02 .10 .02 < .0 l <.01 Intercept TOP Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age. BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked R2= .29 Adj R2 = .27 Natural log Table 42 Multivariable Regression Model of Triglycerides* byTO F and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 2.736 0.056 -0.017 0.113 0.014 0.055 0.008 0.030 -0.007 SE 0.223 0.017 0.067 0.070 0.005 0.007 0.003 0.034 0.004 p value <.0001 .0009 .81 .10 .005 <.0001 .002 .37 .07 .Company Page 73 o f 121 Partial R .06 <.01 .08 .02 .10 .02 <.01 <.01 Intercept PFOS Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2 = .18 Adj R2 = .16 Natural log Table 43 Multivariable Regression Model of Alkaline Phosphatase41by PFOS and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 3.718 0.013 0.036 0.149 0.0008 -0.004 0.002 - 0.024 -0.002 0.083 SB 0.362 0.013 0.032 0.034 0.002 0.004 0.001 0.016 0.002 . 0.024 p value <.0001 .32 . .26 <.0001 .73 .26 .17 .14 .41 .0006 , . Company Page 74 ot'121 Partial R2 .02 <.01 .11 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 < .0 l .02 Intercept ' PFOA Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2 = .18 AdjllVlO "'Natural log , Table 44 Multivariable Regression Model of Alkaline Phosphatase* by PFOA and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 3.746 0.0001 0.047 0.154 0.0006 -0.004 0.002 -0.024 -0.001 0.086 SE 0.128 0.010 0.032 0.035 0.002 0.004 0.001 0.017 0.002 0.024 p value <.0001 .99 , .15 <.0001 .80 .24 .18 .14 .52 .0004 j M Company Page 75 o f 121 Partial R2 .03 <.01 .10 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 .03 Table 45 Multivariable Regression Model of Alkaline Phosphatase* by PFOS and PFOA and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Intercept PFOS PFOA Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* Parameter 3.747 0.015 -0.005 0.040 0.153 0.0007 -0.004 0.002 -0.024 -0.002 0.085 SE 0.128 0.014 0.012 0.033 0.034 t 0.002 0.004 0.001 0.017 0.002 0.024 p value <.0001 .28 .65 .23 <.0001 .78 .25 .17 .15 .42 .0005 R2 = .18 Adj R2= .16 Natural log . _Jl Company Page 76 o f 121 Partial R2 .02 <.01 <.01 .10 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 .02 Intercept TOF Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2= .I8 AdJ R1*=.16 Natural log Table 46 Multivariable Regression Model of Alkaline Phosphatase* by TOP and Ollier Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program . Parameter 3.747 0.006 0.037 0.147 0.0008 -0.004 0.002 -0.024 -0.002 0.084 Aik Phos SE 0.128 0.008 0.033 0.034 0.002 0.004 0.001 0.016 . 0.002 0.024 p value <.0001 . .47 .27 <.0001 .72 .25 .18 .14 .45 .0006 i Company Page 77 o f 121 Partial R2 .04 <.01 .10 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 .02 _ Intercept ' PFOS Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2 = .25 Adj R2 = .23 ` Natural log Table 47 Multivariable Regression Model of GGT* by PFOS and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 1.246 0.028 -0.003 0.255 0.0003 0.006 0.003 0.117 0.002 0.294 SE 0.239 0.024 0.059 0.063 0.004 0.007 0.003 0.031 0.004 ' 0.045 p value <.0001 .24 . .96 <.0001 .95 .36 .28 .0002 .45 <.0001 , Company Page 78 of 121 Partial R .03 <.01 .07 <.01 . .02 .01 .03 <.01 .08 Intercept ' PFOA Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2 = .25 Ai(| R2- .21 *Nttlmal lug Table 48 Multivariable Regression Model of GGT* by PFOA and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 1.245 0.032 -0.020 0.235 0.0009 0.006 0.003 0.116 0.003 0.289 SE 0.238 0.019 . 0.060 0.065 0.004 0.007 0.003 0.031 0.004 , 0.045 p value <.0001 0.10 . .74 .0003 .84 .35 .28 .0002 .40 <.0001 A Company Page 79 of 121 Partial R2 .04 <.01 .06 .01 .02 .01 .03 <.01 .08 Intercept ' PFOS PFOA Production lob (yes/no) Anlwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2= .25 Adj R2 = .23 Natural log Table 49 Multivariable Regression Model of GGT* by PFOS and PFOA and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 1.246 0.014 0.028 - 0.026 0.23 0.0009 0.006 0.003 0.116 0.003 0.288 SE 0.239 0.027 ' 0.021 0.062 0.065 0.004 0.007 0.003 0.031 0.004 0.045 p value t <.0001 .60 . .20 .67 .0003 .82 .34 .27 .0002 .46 <.0001 i Company Page 80 of 121 Partial R2 .03 .02 <.001 .06 .01 .02 .01 .03 <.01 .08 Intercept ' TOF Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2 = .25 A ll It 'i l l N atural log Table 50 Multivariable Regression Model of GGT* by TOF and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 1.246 0.029 -0.028 0.235 0.001 0.006 0.003 0.116 0.003 0.288 SE : 0.238 . 0.016 0.061 0.064 0.004 0.007 0.003 0.031 0.003 0.045 p value <.0001 .06 . .64 .0003 .82 .33 .28 .0002 .48 <.0001 i Company t'uge 81 of 121 Partial R2 .04 <.01 .06 .01 .02 01 , .03 <.01 .07 Intercept PFOS Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2 = .09 Adj R2= .07 Natural log Table 51 Multivariable Regression Model of AST* by PFOS and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decutur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 2.725 0.013 -0.022 0.114 0.003 0.002 -0.003 0.052 -0.004 0.055 SE 0.133 0.013 0.033 0.035 0.002 0.004 0.001 0.017 0.002 0.025 p value <.0001 .33 . .50 .001 1 .28 .53 .04 .002 .05 .03 ViM Company Page 82 of 121 Partial R2 - <.01 <.01 .03 <.01 <.01 <.01 .02 .01 .01 Intercept PFOA Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decutur Age BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2= .09 Adj R2 = .07 Natural log Table 52 Multivariable Regression Model of AST* by PFOA and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 2.725 0.015 -0.030 0.105 0.003 0.002 -0.003 0.051 -0.004 0.053 SE 0.133 0.011 0.034 0.036 0.002 0.004 0.001 0.017 0.002 0.025 p value <.0001 .17 . .37 .004 .23 JSl .04 .003 .05 .04 ..^Company Page 83 o f 121 Partial R .01 <.01 .02 <.01 <.01 <.01 .02 .01 <.01 Intercept , PFOS PFOA Production Job (yes/no) Anlwerp/Deeatur Age BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2 - .09 Adj R2 = .07 '"Natural log Table 53 Multivariable Regression Model of AST* by PFOS and PFOA and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter SE ; p value 2.725 0.132 <.0001 0.006 0.015 .68 0.013 0.012 .28 - 0.033 0.104 0.034 0.036 .34 .004 0.003 0.002 ' .23 0.002 0.004 .50 -0.003 0.001 .04 0.052 * 0.017 .003 -0.004 0.002 .04 0.052 0.025 .04 i Company Page 84 of 121 Partial R2 - <.01 <.01 <.01 .02 <.01 <.01 <.01 .02 .01 <.01 Intercept ' TOF Production Job (yes/no) Anlwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2 = .09 Adj R2= .07 Natural log Table 54 Multivariable Regression Model of AST* by TOF and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 2.725 0.011 -0.031 0.106 0.003 0.002 -0.003 0.052 -0.004 0.053 SE 0.133 0.009 0.034 0.036 0.002 0.004 0.001 0.017 0.002 0.025 p value <.0001 .17 . .36 .003 .24 .51 .04 .003 .04 ..04 a Company Page 85 of 121 Partial R2 .01 <.01 .02 <.01 <.01 <.01 .02 .01 <.01 Intercept ' PFOS Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2 = .27 Adj R2 = .25 . Natural log Table 55 Multivariable Regression Model of ALT* by PFOS and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 1.744 0.021 0.017 0.172 -0.002 0.025 -0.007 -0.006 -0.004 0.189 SE 0.165 0.018 0.043 0.042 0.003 0.004 0.002 0.024 0.002 0.032 p value <.0001 .25 .69 <.0001 .50 <.0001 .0003 .79 .10 <.0001 .. Company Page 86 of 121 Partial R2 .01 <.01 .06 <.01 .13 .01 <.01 <.01 .05 Intercept PFOA Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BM1 Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2 = .27 Adj R2 = .25 Natural log Table 56 . Multivariable Regression Model of ALT* by PFOA and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 20(H) Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 1.761 0.005 0.027 0.186 -0.002 0.024 -0.007 -0.005 -0.004 0.190 SE 0.165 0.003 0.041 0.041 0.003 0.004 > 0.002 0.024 0.002 . 0.032 p value <.0001 .13 . .51 <.0001 .44 <.0001 .0002 .83 .15 <.0001 . u ^ l Company Page 87 of 121 Partial R - <.01 <.01 .07 <.01 .12 .01 <.01 <.01 .05 Intercept PFOS PFOA Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2 = .27 Adj R2= .26 *Natural log Table 57 Multivariable Regression Model of ALT* by PFOS and PFOA and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 1.757 0.019 0.004 0.013 0.176 -0.002 0.025 -0.007 -0.006 -0.004 0.187 SE 0.165 0.018 0.003 : 0.043 0.042 0.003 0.004 0.002 0.024 0.002 0.032 p value . < .0001 .29 . .15 .76 <.0001 .50 <.0001 .0003 .80 .11 <.0001 . Company Page 88 of 121 Partial R .01 <.01 <.01 .06 <.01 .12 <.01 <.01 < .0 l .05 Intercept ' TOP Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2 = .32 Adj R2= .31 Natural log Table 58 Multivariable Regression Model of ALT* by TOP and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 1.965 0.029 - 0.054 0.296 -0.003 0.012 -0.007 0.01 -0.002 0.199 SE 0.193 0.013 0.050 0.051 0.004 0.005 0.002 0.025 0.003 0.04 p value <.0001 .02 . .27 <.0001 .38 .02 .0003 .62 .44 <.0001 A Company Page 89 of 121 Partial R2 .06 <.01 .15 <.01 .04 .01 <.01 . <.01 .05 Intercept PFOS Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides'* R2 = .29 Adj R2 = .27 Natural log Table 59 Multivariable Regression Model of Total Bilirubin'* by PFOS and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Anlweq) and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 0.209 -0.017 -0.068 - 0.262 0.001 . -0.005 -0.008 0.005 0.0002 -0.015 SE 0.145 0.015 0.036 0.038 0.003 0.004 0.002 0.02 0.002 0.027 p value <.0001 .25 . .06 <.0001 .58 .19 <.0001 .80 .94 .57 .1 Company Page 90 of 121 Partial R2 .03 .01 .18 <.01 <.01 .06 <.01 <.01 <.01 Intercept PFOA Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur . Age BMI Cigaretles/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2= .29 Adj R2 = .2 Natural log Table 60 Multivariable Regression Model of Total Bilirubin* by PFOA and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and DecaRir Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 0.210 -0.004 -0.078 - 0.265 0.002 -0.005 -0.008 0.005 -0.0002 -0.018 SE 0.145 0.011 0.037 0.039 0.003 0.004 0.002 0.019 0.002 0.027 p value <.0001 .74 . .04 <.0001 .54 .21 <.0001 .80 .91 .52 i Company Page 91 of 121 Partial R2 .05 .01 .17 <.01 <.01 .06 <.01 <.01 < .0 I Intercept ' PFOS PFOA Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BM1 Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2 = .29 Adj R2= .27 "`Natural log Table 61 Multivariable Regression Model of Total Bilirubin41by PFOS and PFOA and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 20(X) Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 0.209 -0.018 0.002 -0.070 -0.264 0.002 -0.005 -0.008 0.005 0.0002 -0.016 SE 0.144 0.016 0.013 0.037 0.039 0.003 0.004 0.002 0.002 . 0.002 0.027 p value <.0001 .27 . .86 .063 <.0001 .57 .20 <.0001 .81 .95 .56 .1 Company Page 92 of 121 Partial R .03 .02 .01 .16 <.01 <.01 .06 <.01 <.01 <.01 Intercept TOP Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BM1 Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2= .29 Adj R2 = .27 *Natural log Table 62 Multivariable Regression Model of Total Bilirubin* by TOF and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 0.210 -0.011 -0.064 -0.257 0.001 -0.005 -0.008 0.005 0.00007 -0.014 SE 0.144 0.009 0.037 0.039 0.003 0.004 0.002 0.019 0.002 0.027 p value , <.0001 .25 . .09 <.0001 .62 .19 <.0001 .78 .98 .60 Company Page 93 o f 121 Partial R .06 .01 .16 <.01 <.01 .06 <.01 <.01 <.01 Intercept PFOS Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BM1 Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2 = .07 Adj R2 = .05 Natural log Table 63 Multivariable Regression Model of TSH* by PFOS and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter - 0.539 0.015 0.109 0.184 0.005 - 0.005 -0.005 0.057 - 0.008 0.204 SE 0.327 0.033 0.081 0.086 0.006 0.009 0.003 0.042 0.005 0.061 p value .10 .65 . .18 .03 .36 .56 .17 .17 .13 .001 i Company Page 94 o f 121 Partial R2 - <.01 <.01 .02 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 .02 Intercept PFOA Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2= .07 Adj R2 = .05 Natural log Table 64 t Multivariable Regression Model of TSH* by PFOA and Other Potential Explanatory Variables ' for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 20CKJ Medical Surveillance Program Parameter - 0.539 0.018 0.100 0.173 0.006 -0.005 -0.005 0.056 -0.008 0.201 SE 0.327 0.027 0.083 0.088 0.006 0.009 0.003 0.042 0.005 0.062 p value .10 .51 . .23 .051 .33 .56 .17 .18 .13 .001 .1 Company Page 95 o f 121 Partial R2 .02 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 .02 Intercept PFOS PFOA Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2 = .07 Adj R2 = .05 Natural log Table 65 Multivariable Regression Model of TSH* by PFOS and PFOA and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter -0.539 0.007 0.015 0.096 0.173 0.006 -0.005 -0.005 0.056 -0.008 0.200 SE . 0.327 0.036 0.029 0.084 0.089 0.006 0.009 i 0.003 0.042 0.005 0.062 p value .10 .85 . .61 .25 .05 .33 .57 .17 .18 -.13 .001 .A Company Page 96 of 12 i Partial R2 - <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 .02 Intercept TOF Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age. BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2 = .07 Adj R2 = .05 Natural log Table 66 Multivariable Regression Model of TSH* by TOP and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter -0.539 0.015 0.097 .174 0.006 -0.005 -0.005 0.056 -0.008 0.201 SE i 0.327 0.021 0.084 0.088 0.006 0.009 \ 0.003 0.042 0.005" 0.062 p value .10 .49 . .25 -.05 .33 .57 .17 .18 .12 .001 A Company Page 97 of 121 Partial R2 .02 <.01 .01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 .02 Intercept PFOS Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigareltes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2 = .02 Adj R2 = .01 '"Natural log Table 67 Multivariable Regression Model of T4* by PFOS and Ollier Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 2.263 -0.003 -0.003 0.011 -0.003 0.001 0.0009 - 0.024 0.001 - 0.018 SE 0.090 0.009 0.022 0.024 0.002 0.003 0.0009 0.012 0.001 0.017 p value , <.001 .78 . .91 .64 .08 .66 .32 .04 .35 .29 . Company Page 98 of 12 i Partial R2 - <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 Intercept - PFOA Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2= .03 Adj R2 = .01 Natural log Table 68 Multivariable Regression Model of T4* by PFOA and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwetp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program . Parameter 2.263 0.0003 -0.005 0.010 -0.003 0.001 0.001 -0.02 0.001 -0.019 SE 0.090 ' 0.007 0.023 0.024 0.002 ' 0.003 0.0009 0.01 0.001 0.017 p value <.0001 .97 . .82 .69 .09 .64 .31 .04 .37 .28 ' *..t e99i>l 121 Partial R2 -, < .0 i <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 Intercept PFOS PFOA Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2 .0 3 Adj R2 = < .01 Natural log Table 69 Multivariable Regression Model of T4* by PFOS and PFOA and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 2.263 -0.003 0.001 -0.004 0.010 -0.003 0.001 0.0009 -0.024 0.001 -0.018 SE 0.090 0.010 0.008 0.023 0.024 0.002 0.003 0.0009 0.012 0.001 0.017 p value <.0001 .74 . .86 .87 .68 .09 .65 .32 .04 .35 .29 . . Company Page 100 of 121 Partial R2 - <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 < .0 l <.01 Intercept ' TOF Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigureltes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2 = .03 Adj R2 = < .01 Natural log Table 70 Multivariable Regression Model of T4* by TOF and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program J f A Company Page 101 of 121 Parameter_________________ SE ______________ p value_______________ Partial R2 2.263 0.090 <.0001 - 0.0002 0.006 .97 <.01 -0.005 0.023 . .82 <.01 0.010 0.024 .68 <.01 -0.003 0.002 .09 <.01 0.001 0.003 .64 <.01 0.001 0.0009 .31 <.01 i -0.024 0.012 .04 <.01 0.001 0.001 .37 <.01 -0.019 0.017 .28 <.01 Intercept ' PFOS Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age DMI Cigarettcs/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2 = .06 Adj R2 = .04 Natural log Table 71 Multivariable Regression Model of Free T4* by PFOS and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antweip and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 0.299 0.004 -0.030 -0.021 -0.003 -0.003 0.0009 0.006 0.002 0.003 SE 0.076 0.008 0.019 0.020 0.001 0.002 0.0008 0.010 0.00?. 0.014 p value <.0001 .63 . .11 .28 .03 .13 .27 .56 .21 .85 i M Company Page 102 of 121 Partial R2 - <.0J <.01 .03 .01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 Intercept ' PFOA Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age. BM1 Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2= .07 Adj R2 = .04 Natural log / Table 72 Multivariable Regression Model of Free T4* by PFOA and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 0.299 -0.006 -0.025 -0.017 -0.003 -0.003 -0.0009 0.006 0.002 0.004 SE 0.076 0.006 0.019 J. 0.021 0.001 0.002 0.0008 0.010 0.001 0.014 p value .0001 .31 . .19 .41 .02 .13 .27 .53 .20 .78 M Cuiiipmiy i - g e 103 of 121 Partial R2 .01 <.01 .02 .01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 Intercept . PFOS PFOA Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age EMI Cigareltes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2 .0 7 Adj R2 = .04 'tural log Table 73 Multivariable Regression Model of Free T4* by PFOS and PFOA and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 0.299 -0.0005 -0.006 -0.025 -0.020 -0.003 -0.003 -0.0009 0.006 0.002 0.004 SE 0.076 0.008 0.007 0.020 0.210 0.001 0.002 0.0008 0.010 0.001 0.014 p value .0001 .96 . .37 .21 .41 .02 .13 .27 .54 `.20 .77 3M Company Page 104 of 121 Partial R2 - <.01 <.01 <.01 .02 .01 <.01 .002 <.01 <.01 <.01 Intercept TOP Production lob (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigaretles/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2= .06 Adj R2= .04 Natural log Table 74 Multivariable Regression Model of Free T4* by TOP and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 0.299 0.004 -0.025 -0.018 -0.003 -0.003 0.0009 0.006 0.002 0.004 SE 0.076 0.005 0.020 0.020 0.001 0.002 0.0008 0.010 0.001 0.014 p value .0001 .37 . .19 .38 .02 .13 .27 . .01 .19 .79 3M Company Page 105 of 121 Partial R2 .01 <.01 .02 .01 < .0 l <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 Intercept PFOS Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigareltes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2 = .35 Adj R2 = .34 NmIihhI loft Table 75 Multivariable Regression Model of THBR* by PFOS and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 3.589 -0.003 -0.006 -0.090 -0.0005 -0.001 -0.0007 -0.015 -0.0002 -0.003 SE 0.041 0.004 0.010 0.011 0.0008 0.001 0.0004 0.005 0.0007 0.008 p value <.0001 .40 . .55 <.0001 .50 .29 .13 .005 .77 .75 i age 106 of 121 Partial R2 .03 <.0I . .30 <.01 <.01 <.01 .01 <.01 <.01 Intercept PFOA Produclion Job (yes/no) Anlwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarelles/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2= .35 Adj R2 = .34 Nnlurul log Table 76 Multivariable Regression Model of THBR* by PFOA and Ollier Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 3.589 -0.003 -0.006 -0.089 -0.0005 -0.001 -0.0007 0.015 -0.0002 -0.002 SE 0.041 0.003 0.010 0.011 0.0008 0.001 . 0.0004 0.005 0.0006 0.00 p value <.0001 .43 . .58 <.0001 .48 .29 .13 .004 .71 .76 * 'X 3M Company Page 107 of 121 Partial R2 .04 <.01 .28 <.01 <.01 <.01 .01 <.01 <.01 Intercept PFOS PFOA Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigareltes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2= .35 Adj R2 = .34 Natural log Table 77 Multivariable Regression Model of THBR* by PFOS and PFOA and Ollier Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 3.589 -0.003 -0.002 -0.005 -0.088 -0.0006 -0.001 -0.0007 0.015 -0.0002 -0.002 SE 0.041 0.005 0.004 0.0J1 0.011 0.0008 0.001 0.0004 0.005 0.0007 0.008 p value <.0001 ' .58 . .64 .66 <.0001 .47 .28 .13 .004 .78 .79 l 3M Company Page 108 of 121 Partial R` .03 .02 < .0 i .28 <.01 <.01 <.01 .01 <.01 <.01 Intercept TOF Production Job (yes/no) Anlwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigareltes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2 = .35 Adj R2 = .34 ` Natural log Table 78 Multivariable Regression Model of THBR* by TOP and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medjcal Surveillance Program Parameter 3.589 -0.003 -0.004 -0.088 -0.0006 -0.001 -0.0007 0.015 -0.0002 -0.002 SE 0.041 0.003 0.011 0.011 0.0008 0.001 0.0004 0.005 0.0007 0.008 p value <.0001 .29 . .69 <.0001 .45 .28 .13 .004 .77 .80 3M Company Page 109 of 121 Partial R2 .05 <.01 .28 <.01 <.01 <.01 .01 <.01 <.01 Intercept PFOS Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked lll|jlV' HltliH1 ii' hi A il] I ' ' III! ^Natural log Table 79 Multivariable Regression Model of PTI* by PFOS and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 1.239 -0.006 -0.009 -0.078 -0.003 -0.0001 0.0002 -0.008 0.001 (HIM SE 0.085 0.009 ' 0.021 0.022 0.002 0.002 0.0009 0.011 0.001 lllllli p value <.0001 .45 . .65 .0004 .03 .96 .82 .44 .41 10 Partial 1 .01 <.01 .07 .02 < .0 l <.01 <.01 <.01 III Intercept PFOA Production Job (yes/no) Ant werp/Decatur Age DMI Cigareltcs/day Drinks/day Yeurs Worked Triglycerides* R3 = .l0 Adj R3 = .08 '"Natural log Table 80 Multivariable Regression Model of FIT" by PFOA and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 1.239 -0.002 -0.012 - 0.079 -0.003 -0.00007 0.0002 -0.008 0.001 -0.023 SE 0.08S 0.007 0.021 0.023 0.002 0.002 0.0009 ' 0.011 0.001 0.016 p value <.0001 .77 . .56 .0006 ' .03 .98 .80 .44 .47 .15 t 3M Company Page 111 of 121 Partial R '- .01 <.01 .07 .02 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 Intercept PFOS ' PFOA Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarettes/day Drinks/day . Years Worked Triglycerides* R 2 = .10 Adj R2 = .08 Natural log Table 81 Multivariable Regression Model of FTI* by PFOS and PFOA and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 1.239 -0.006 0.0002 -0.010 -0.079 -0.003 -0.0001 0.0002 -0.008 0.001 -0.022 SE : 0.085 0.009 0.008 0.022 0.023 0.002 0.002 0.0009 0 .0 1 1 0.001 0.016 VO 00 p value <.0001 .49 .66 .0007 .03 .96 .82 .44 .41 .17 JM Company Page 112 of 121 Partial R` - .01 <.01 <.01 .06 .02 .02 <.01 <.01 .002 .004 Intercept TOF Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarettes/day Drinlcs/day Years Worked Triglycerides* RJ = .10 Adj R2 = .08 Natural log : Table 82 Multivariable Regression Model of FTI* by TOF and Ollier Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 1.239 -0.003 -0.010 -0.078 -0.003 0.0001 . 0.0002 -0.008 0.001 -0.022 SE 0.085 0.006 0.022 0.023 : 0.002 0.002 0.0009 0.011 0.001 0.016 p value <.0001 * .62 . .63 .0007 .03 .97 .81 .44 .44 .16 3M Company Page 113 o f 121 Partial R2 .01 <.01 .06 .02 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 Intercept ' PFOS Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur . Age BMI Cigurettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2= .12 A 'P ' = 1 ^Nulural lug Table 83 Multivariable Regression Model of T3* by PFOS and Ollier Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 4.702 0.015 0.022 -0.099 -0.002 0.005 0.003 i -0.027 -0.0006 0.020 ' SE . 0.074 0.007 0.018 0.019 0.001 0.002 0.0008 0.009 0.001 0.014 p value <.0001 .04 . .23 <.0001 .24 .02 .001 .004 .60 .15 A Company Page 114 of 121 Partial R2 - .01 .01 .03 <.01 .02 .02 .02 <.01 <.01 Intercept ' PFOA Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BMI Cigarcttcs/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2 = .13 Adj R2 = .11 Natural log Table 84 Multivariable Regression Model of T3* by PFOA and Ollier Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program ' Parameter 4.702 0.016 0.015 -0.109 -0.001 0.005 0.003 -0.028 -0.0004 0.018 SE , 0.073 0.006 0.019 0.020 0.001 0.002 0.0008 0.009 0.001 . 0.014 p value <.0001 .01 . .41 <.0001 .33 .02 .001 .003 .70 .20 Company Page 115 of 121 Partial R2 .02 <.01 .03 <.01 .02 ` .02 .02 <.01 <.01 Intercept ' PFOS PFOA Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BM1 Cigarettes/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* RJ = .13 AdjR2= .U '"Natural log Table 85 Multivariable Regression Model of T3* by PFOS and PFOA and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 4.703 0.009 0.013 0.012 -0.109 -0.001 0.005 0.003 -0.028 -0.0006 0.017 SE 0.073 0.008 0.007 0.019 0.020 0.001 0.002 0.0008 0.009 0.001 0.014 p value <.0001 .29 . .05 .54 <.0001 .35 .01 .001 .003 .59 .23 i Company Page 116 of 121 Partial R2 .01 <.01 <01 .03 <.01 .02 .02 .02 <.01 <.01 Intercept ' TOP Production Job (yes/no) Antwerp/Decatur Age BM1 Cigaretles/day Drinks/day Years Worked Triglycerides* R2 = .13 Adj R2 = .11 Natural log Table 86 Multivariable Regression Model of T3* by TOP and Other Potential Explanatory Variables for Antwerp and Decatur Male Employee Participants, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Parameter 4.702 0.014 0.011 -0.109 0 -0.001 0.005 0.003 - 0.028 -0.0007 0.017 SE 0.073 0.005 0.019 0.020 0.001 0.002 0.0007 0.009 0.001 . 0.014 p value <.0001 .004 . .54 <.0001 .35 .01 .001 .003 .56 .22 . M Company Page 117 of 121 Partial R2 .02 <.01 .03 <.01 .02 .02 .02 <.01 <.01 3M Company ?=age 118 of 121 Figure 1. Linear Regression Model of Triglgycerides* by PFOA* for Antwerrr Male Employees, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Summary of Fit RSquare a* Analysis of Variance 0.029 Source Model Error C Total OF Sum of Sauares Mean Sauare 1 1.863 1.863 204 61.193 0.299 205 63.056 F Ratio 6.211 Prob>F 0.014 Parameter Estimates Term Intercept In PFOA Estimate Std Error t Ratio Prob>ltl 4.695 0.042 111.43 <0001 0.073 0.029 2.49 0.014 natural log 3M Company Page 119 of 121 Figure 2. Linear Regression of Triglycerides* by PFOA* for Decatur Male Employees, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program Summary of Fit RSquare 0.028 Analysis of Variance. Source Model Error C Total DF Sum of Sauares Mean Sauare 1 2.164 2.164 213 73.969 0.347 214 76.133 F Ratio 6.232 Prob>F 0.013 Parameter Estimates Term Intercept In PFOA Estimate Std Error t Ratio Prob>ltl 5.052 0.041 122.27 <0001 0.098 0.039 2.50 0.013 natural log 3M Company '^ a g e 120 of 121 Figure 3. Linear Regression of Triglycerides* by PFOA* for Antwerp a n d Dec Female Employees, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program RSquare Summary of Rt 0.078 Analysis of Variance Source______DF Sum of Squares Mean Square Model 1 2.519 2.519 Error 95 29.877 0.314 C Total 96 32396 F Ratioc 8.01(1 ProbsJF 0.0065 Parameter Estimates Term__________ Estimate Std Error t Ratio Prob>ltl Intercept 4.690 0.081 58.14 <0001 In PFOA 0.091 0.032 2.83 0.006 natural log 3M Company Page 121 of 121 Figure 4. Linear Regression of Triglycerides* by PFOA* for Cottage Grove Male Employees, 2000 Medical Surveillance Program RSquare Summary of Fit 0.008 Analysis of Variance Source______ DF Sum of Squares Mean Square Model 1 0.452 0.452 Error 129 54.251 0.421 C Total 130 54.704 F Ratio 1.076 Prob>F 0.302 Parameter Estimates Term Intercept In PFOA Estimate Std Error t Ratio Prob>ltl 5.022 0.057 88.04 <0001 0.032 0.031 1.04 0.302 natural log