Document gEg2qybkneng6Emy7jNJJrd5e

ANTWEitp BY TZSTING RESTILTS FROM JUBM, 1995 1. Pu=)oso of the Blood Tostina Procr=m (STP) Blood testina for the Presence of FC 95 (?FOS) and FC 143 (PFQR) was cc lated at the Antwerp Plant in June, 1995. This was undertaken to auantitate individual exposures as well as to cain additional insiahts into the mechanism of exposure. Svecificallv, the followina insichts were obtained throuch this vroaram: A. IncLividual measures of PFOS and PFOA, chemistrv profiles, blood counts, and occupational histories were obtained on all Participants. (Ftedback to individuals has alreadv been done via indez>endent comunication. A samD7e of this lerter is included in the infoxmtion iDrecedinc7the B. Areas within the Antwe= facilitv were compared to one another in te=s of individual 6=03ures. C. Co=arisons of exposure levels were made to other fluorochemical manufacturina facilities. D. An examination was made of the relationship of fluorochaulicalblood levels to other laboratorv Parameters. 2. What was dme This ;)ro=am consisted of a medical and work historv cruestionnaire (see attached), blood chemistries (lipid levels, liver function tests, kidnev function tests, blood sucar, calcium), blood counts thamoclobin, homtocrit, white blood call count, Platelet count, differential counts), and blood levels of PFOA and PFOS. In addition, for those workers who were felt to )iave the Potential for more exposure blood hormone levels festradiol, testosterone, LB, FSE, sex hormone bindina alobulin, cortisol, 17-hvdroxv Prooesterone, TSH) were also done. Multirle laboratories were used in the analvses. The United Hospital Lab in St. Paul, verfoz3aed blood cheilistrv and blood count tests an all particioents. Hormones were measured at the Universitv of Nimesota Dect. of Laboratorv Medicine and Patholoav. Standardized hormone assav kits were used. These kits were the same kits that have been used creviouslv in coni=ction with other testina vroar in Decatur and Cottace Grove. PEDA and PFOS tests were conducted via 3M,s Environmental Technolocrv Services in St. Paul. The method used in this datezzination cons@sted of a standardized extraction technicue devolomed bv Ylinen et. al. (Arch. Environ. Contan. Toxical. 14:713-717, 1985). This technicrue uses tetrabutvlammonium to ion-nair with PFO and PFOS in ser=, and the ion-vairs are extra-ced with ethvl acetate. The abstraction was then analyzed usinc hich Performance licuid chro-Atoorachv-thermoscrav mass sidectrometrv. This technicrue has been found reliable in Previous testina. Obtainina the medical and work history Portion of this effort was handled locally by Antwero z)ersonnel, usinc the Plant ohvsician to translate the auestionnaire from Enclish to Flemish. E=Iovees essentiallv filled in cuestionnaires with assista,,ice from Plant Personnel. 3. Dea=ii*tive results Means, mini-i, and maximum values ace listed in Table I for 55 variables. This is a co=lete listina of variables for which information was crathered. 93 individuals varticildated in the croar&zl. Their averaae aae was 36 vears. The mean PFOS value was 1.83 mm. The moan PFOA value was 1.13 upa. The hiahest PFOS value was 9.9 vm while the hiahest PE'OA value was 13.2 1D=. Co=arison distributions for Cottaae Grove and Decatur Plants is listed in Asmandices I and 2. Other mean values of interest included an averaae time worked for 3M of 11 years, an averacre blood Pressure of 125/78, an averacre of ciaarette mokina of 15 vear3. an averaae of 9 d--inks Per week. an averaa* weicht of 163 lbs. ('74Ka), an averaae heicht of 5 feet, 9.6 inches (1*76.7 cm). and an averacre total cholesterol of 212 mcrt. He=alobin. whit* blood cell count, red blood cell count, Platelet count, liver function tests, and kidney function tests all revealed only svoradic values out of the normal range. Tables 2 and 3 indicate the relationshiid of PFOS and PFOA leV*13 tresoectiveiv) to location of the &--lovees' current iobs. As shown, the hiahest levels of PFOS were found in workers who cur=entlv are in the now :)art of buildina 3. Their averaae ?FOS level was 4.03 v= for 15 individuals. For PIPOS, backaround levels &re around 0.35 ID= based on administration and OC lab Personnel levels. BuildLna 16 revc&2ed the hiabest PFQA Mean (2.8 cam for 13 individuals). Bar-karound levelsfor PFOA are around 0.5 0= in nOn-exiDozed iobs. This same relationshild *xists when we *xam4-ned the loncest held i*b. In this case those people who had their loncest lob at builctina 3 had the hiahe3t PFOS levels (4.45 com for 15 people). Those who indicated that their lonaes". held lob was in Buildina 16 had the hiahest PFOA levels (2.86 Dom for 14 individuals) . In terms of personal hvcriene and its effect on blood levels of fluor6chemLicals, in the Antwe= workers there does not appear to be anv relationship. There was no si=i!icant difference in P M or PFOS levels in those who washed their hands :frecruentlv vs. those who washed infreauentiv. Likewise, for those who laundered their work clothes freauentlv there were no differences in PFOA or PFOS levels vs. those who washed their clothes infrecruentiv. More frecruent skin contact with chemicals in ceneral did not seem to be related to hiaher PFCA or PFOS levels. individuals indicated that thev had experienced the tallowina t%voes and numbers of diseases: Hepatitis A or B. 5 individuals Cancer, tvpe =specified, I individual Abnormal liver tests. 4 individuals Prostatic hvdertroobv, 1 individual ostoolmrosis, 1 individual Diabetes nellitus, I individual Tables 4A and B are correlation matrices of variables associated with PE'OA and PFOS for the entire crrout>of workers. This is a Prolizinarv step in the assessment of these chemicals to potential health problems. (The second step of this process is to do multivariate statistical analVBC3 Which Will be forthcomina under separate cover.) However, in oaneral, the siml* correlations are a oood rez)re3entation of what will show = in the multivariate analvaes. For the simle correlations, there are three Values listed. the correlation coefficient (too), the vvalue (middle) and the number of people in the analvsis (bottom). For a sianificant statistical association in this sett4na, a *-value of less than .01 is considered si;L:ficant. As the tables indicate, there were no strona associations with anv of the blood test results. There are weak associations (see below) of PM and alkaline r)hosvhatase (a -liver anzvme) as well as PFOS and creatinirse (an ineiicator of kidnev function) . In the latter, the relationship shows that with increasina PFOS levels. kidnev function inwroves. The relatiOU3hiP is therefore of no clinicacloll3ecruence. Tables SA and 9 are coirelation matrices of variables associated with PFW. and Pros for the arour of workers who were fel,*.to have More likely O=osures. Aaain, there are few a33ociatic" that are si=ificant. Alkaline choschatase is not correlated with PFCA in this aroud. which Should have more exoosure. Included in these tables are the hormone values, some of which have been found to have associations wit:h PM in the animal literature. Aaain, there is no strona relationship indicated with any of the hormone variables. There were, however, weak relationships found between PFCA and trialvceride3 (corr. coef.-.48. D-.0005). The si=ificance of which is in auestion, since this relationshic has never appeared in the medical or toxicaloav literature and is likelv to be a chance findinc. 4. Z=reos;ion C>verall, the mean PFOA and PFOS values for Antwerc are lower than Cottaae Grove and Decatur. Also, the maxim= values are considerably lower than the other clants. my feelina is that exposure in Antwe= is minimal and see= to be under control. Whether this is due to a difference in lorocessina or to individual hvaiene/safetv cractices or all of these is not known. Whatever exposures do take clace ae*z.to be focused in buildina 3 (new cart) in the case of PFOS and buildina 16 in the ca30 Of PEDA. In ter= of diseases present in current workers (which represents an inen-lete ascertai=ent) there do not appear to be obvious croblms in excess. Neither are there diseases present which wou2d be of concern, relative to the animal literature. In reaard to the blood chemistries and blood counts, these avaear to be it",-elatedto PFOS or PM levels. However, there are 9 individuals who have indicated som type of liver problem C=rentlv or in the Pazt. This appears to be related to viral etiolcaies for the most =art. There were no relationshiva of liver function abno=alities and PEDA or ?FOS in the si=le correlations. This needs to be further assessed in the multivariable analyses. Likewise, there do not appear to be relationshiz>s of PF'OA and Pro$ to =V of the hormones measured. In te=3 of tht ceneral health carameters of the vlant, there anosars to be considerable amokina as well as alcohol use. 33% of the cartiCiDantS indicated that thev currently smoke. (This is gre&tsr than the smoking rates in Mi=esc-&, which run around 25%.) 321 of the participants indicated that they have more than 10 alcohol-cont&inina cL-ink3 per week tranae was 10-42 d--inksper week). Smakina and drinking rates are clearly higher than in other chemical plants in the U.S. and probably reflect European customs to some dearee. S. Racommmdations Based on the above information the following sucoestions are being made. First of all, it makes sen e to looi further into ".heprocesses for buildings 3 and 16, since these had the highest levels of PFOA and ?FOS. It would make less sense to look at individual hygiene, since the results were fairly uniformly distributed over the 15 workers in this area. But, this is an option. Of concern would be the possibility of not only respirable exposure but also skin exposure. it would be helpful for the plant to share this information with the work crews and to open up the dialogue between inciividualworkers and the plant physician in this topic matter. Additionally, it has been our practice in the US. to have periodic updates in regard to any important toxicoloc.rsytudi*3 that appear in the literature (human or ani=l),, in an onacing way. It's important to relay the info=ation that althouah presumed to be without human health problem, workers need to follow Strict safety precautions when working with them, as they would with any potential chemical exposure. A r"at of this assessment tth-iilbde undertaken periodically. In the US. plants, ttlisassessment is peifo=ed every two years. It becomes more of an expected work practice and facilitates future communication with workers. In the US., we are establishing a disease surveillance system for workers in the fluoroche3Licalplants. This is designed to identify distases in fluorochealicalworkers that have been described in animal studies. It is Used as a mechanism to further enhance our ability to expediently find about these issues, it they do occur. Alternatively, this would also Assist Us in defending the company ac.rairlsftalse Although the Belgium regulations may prohibit this, sOmethinO similar to this would be helpful there. This should be explored in further detail. The maltivariat* sta'tistical An&lvseS need to be finalized bar* before this oroltct is comlote. That should be takinc place ever the next f&w wotks. The additional analyses are notexz)ectotdo alter the above c=nents. This effort w,@-11- focus on the liver function tests, orimarilv. One final note. It should be mentioned that the blood aatherina and shizmina processefsrom Antwerp to Minnesota occurred without a sinalo error. All tubes were collected and analyzed here without & 1039. Additionally, it annears that the plant carticiz)ati= for this effort was the hicrhest of anv of the flucror-hemical exam idroarams in the recent vast. The Deo:)Ie who belved with this effort in Antwe= need to be concrratulated on a iob well done. Please feel free to call either of us with anv cruestions o-co=erits that You may have. Jeffrey H. Mandel, M.D., X.P.H. Associat* Medical Director Jean Burris, R.N., O.H.N., X.P.H. Proiect Co-ordinator 11/6/95 October 10, 1995 TO: FROM: Jeff Mandel, M. D., 3M Medical Department Your blood test for fluorine this year has been completed. Two types of fluorine were measured. The first one reflects PC 143. Your measured level was 2.000 ppm (parts per million). The average for people at your plant was 1.5 ppm. The second results was for FC 95. Your measured level was 4.200 ppm. The avexage for people at your plant was 1.9 PPM-. if your level wax- greater than with your supervisor regarding chemicals. 3 ppm, you should check safe handling of these We will continue to give you feedback about the significance of the blood levels, from a health perspective. In the meantime, we're recommending that all employees with potential exposure to these compounds use strict safety precautions whenever possible. Check with your supervisors if you have any quentionx about safe handling and proper protocti= issues. Flut)rinTeest Results DistributioonfFC95 Values atThree Locations: Cottage Grove-1995,Antwerp-1995, and Deentur-I x 90% 4 7 0%- P 60% r so% c 40% n lo% 20% Girove stwerp 0% ir 4t FC95 ci iM Lftd 0-1 2.1.3 3.1-4 6.1.7 7.1-8 9"-,o 11.1-12 13.1-14 14.1-15 15.1-16 16.1-17 19.1-20 >20 APPendix 2 S-aZ on Mae eb rA pool0" rA rA PRO& CL rA eb eD FA 00 Mms valow ABCU EXM V con wanted for 3M Yrs wanted Bids.2 wwobom -yn-"@fted aw& 3 c@tp-awt Yrswonmd ft 3 am pwt yon warimdfhwn iymmr nuanMgal Yrs worKM UWADM @ Yyyrysyyw.a.nit@e@d a Yrs Worked OC Mb Yrs waitedR" lab YrsworkoM;;;16- Yrs tncurrcnt)o-b Y rsinlossbwd )ob Yrs on )onibeldnon-IM ift Agg SunW Cl$aM=s Yum makw CLPMUCS-pw day ww AY9 rAP OW dOY VM MM MM A#C ROPPOD ciprmn perday Age Metod AnnkM awobal Mofabsap ;F"lwmbngak" Drmkzmvockwbm wm drb*ft Drukw-omk sm Drmb PW dw FC95 FC)43 metw aw -Body Mm Led= Symiie bloodWomim Dwmlic bl*Wpr@ Alk&Uoc PhospbOM Cbolemmi cracm Daid BU&ubm GLUM G G Tnm HDL CbokwmW LDL Chaiauni SGOT SGFT ToW Biixubo Tng"chm memovioa ow Phift cow PW likd C.J), 1 Wbne Blood p 1"5 lngeracbewimlStudy Tabic I 93- 93 9 46 -to '9 9 13 13 I1 14 9() 25 39 53 31 42 52 22 ot 82 3 77 93 93 93 93 93 93 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 1-2 92 93 93 93 93 mum 1 36.2366 1 1 11.2290 0.5m) 6.14" 0. 4.9892 0.0000 5j*% o.owo 4.6010 o.osm 3.3456 a.a3oo 3.9422 A-OSOO 4.3769 10.S= 1.0000 30.1$12 0.0000 8.3086 0.0700 8.6631--- 0.5000 9.1200 1.5000 5.9039 0.2000 16.5660 13.OOW 15.4118 0.0000 9.3929 0.0000 14im o.oow 27.9091 20.ODW- 43132 0.000D 15.3171- I.OOW 18.60W o.oow 1IJ377 0.0= 9.2006 0.0ow li"S O.ODW 1.3= O.ODW 1.13231 O.ODW U.-3961 62.Ml lal-9m 23.760 1252= 73.49" 74.2391 2112597 0.29" 0.2135 SIM91 344M t35.O$g7 25.4"1 43.7391 OJM3 114-MS 12942-S4" 6054 119.0700 17.9013 1looow 60.ODW 3 I.DDW 100.OOW OAM oim 60.ODW 12.0= 31.0ow 22-"" 13.OOW 2iLOOOD o-_mw 34.0000 129".0000 tsim 226.6129 4.&W 6.3677 132.ODW 3.75W 1 3.UW mstuses io-0000 2*?.2000 20-OOOID 20.0000 I 20.0= 11.0000 11.0000 11.0000 9.OOOD 1 21.0000 1 20.0000 19.DOW 21.0000 2 l.oow t 22.000() 20.0000 35.ODW 25.0000 30.OODO 40.0000 25.00M 25-0000 72.0000 50.0000 42.0= 6.0000 9.9ow 131000 75.9943 243.0000 3 L5617 140.ODW too.0ow 121.ODW 340.OOW i.6= 0. 126.ODW 294.DDW 97.DDW 261.3730 %.ODW 122.0000 2.9000 6= -T"50-0000 5 1.20W 16.70W 344.0000 5.74W 13.3-0-0-0 CurrentDepartment .-4N! Admia slidown I Admialitroties Ems 16 Bldg2 Waiib ove, Bldg3 mad other f-4@f@ BMI 3.Admin, o Bldg3.New pire OMS 3,old & New BMI 3.old part Other QC tAb- , R&D IA6 Aii(weri1l995 Fluorocheinic2Situdy - AllEmployees llsiCrharts by I)epgrtmen, 1.600 LON 2.400 IFC"l ppas 2-5" 3.200 3.6" 4.00 Astwom 1995FloarochomileSdtudY- AllF@=Pioym corrdadons AKPH A"= Pboq"UM OLIN CHOL CREA C@n@ DSIL Dvva Biloubin OLUC CIGT G G. Tnm HDL HDL-CMAMMOI LDL LDL-Cbokmuw SCODT SOOT SOPT SGPT Tabi*4A FC143 0.2SI23 0.0066 92 Fc" 0.10593 03149 92 0.093291 0.4299 92 0.01262 0.9m 92 026131 0.0119 92 0.04017 0.703S 92 0.01595 O.Stol 92 -0.3n95 0.0017 92 -0.11343 0.2sl6 92 -0.11172 02890 9i 0.04M 0.6149 92 -0..15576. 0.13821 921 0.07419 0.4822 92 OA4351 0.6904 92 -0.11313 0.=O 92 -0.21665 0.03$D 92 0.20594 0.0419 92 0.072$6 0.4901 92 airms 0.4S73 0.0"70 CM76 92 0.01180 0.4332 92 O.IOU 0.91$D 92 coefli pvuiug nii-Siboefrworkers Ant,,.=1"5 nuanwbenikw Study- AJIFapic)@om cormktkm TBIL Tomi Biivubm TRI ITrigi)@ FP-MADATE Hamsoiogy Dm Hcr Hemumm HGB HemoSlobin MCH MCHC mcv PLCT Pimin Cam RBC Red siow Wh@heaiiw-Celk Tsbit49 FC143 i -O.OM3 OAD78 92 FCYS .0.10720 0.3091 92 Caffelsooncoctricnmnt p-vajue amber of worken 0O.w28n934-1[921 0.10%7 0.29SO 92 -0.159181 0.1273 1 93 -0.14235 om" I 93 0.03412 04=75 --931 1 0.03"] 0.60" 93 019450 0.06171 931 1 0.162131 0.12041 93 1 0.135" 0.13" 1 93 0.06"5" Fm-m 93" 0.122296 02403 93 OM= 1 O.QM 1 93 -0.07479 0.4id2 ;r 02=1 0.01431 0.070M a-wD6 93 -0.11574 Cam, 93 -O.DS7&4 osgl9 OAMSO asm 93 0.01 O.Mi 0.24%9 0.0152 93 Ajmwwp 1"5 FluenwjtmiedSft* - MOm v4* HormoneTating Carrakdons LH Luwk=astwmora FSH PROLAC TSH nlymd MM.IftR bonom SHBO CORRIA cartiow DIMA4 RT Haig* wr woiot aw Body Mm bwm SY37UL Synche bloodpromn TableSA FC1431 0.08043 9.5797 30 0.2@62 0.0451 59 a.IL"4 0.1993 so 0.1 16 0.24" so 01 OM" so 4.15"7 02841 so .0.11M OALIZ so -0.15M 02M so 4.109M OA520 so .0.00231 0.9973 so 0.0710' o.r2ii so FC" i 0.05385 0.7103 50 COMM= =Mffmml p-vaim amwr Of woran 0.17411 0.2266 so 0.12919 0.3-712 50 0.16702 02463 so 0.1 0.2393 so 0.104W 0.4699 so -O.IUOI 0.1909 so 0.1cm 0.4799 so 4)06M OAM so -0.17U3 02193 so -O.WUI 0.9516 so