4.2 Article

Cadmium, lead and mercury in the blood of workers from recycling sorting facilities in Sao Paulo, Brazil

Journal

CADERNOS DE SAUDE PUBLICA
Volume 36, Issue 8, Pages -

Publisher

CADERNOS SAUDE PUBLICA
DOI: 10.1590/0102-311X00072119

Keywords

Occupational Exposure; Lead; Cadmium; Mercury

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Approximately 600,000 people work as recycling material collectors in Brazil and few studies evaluate the health risks involved in this occupation. The objective was to evaluate the blood levels of cadmium (Cd), lead (Pb) and mercury (Hg) among workers from recycling sorting facilities (RSF) in the metropolitan region of Sao Paulo, Brazil, compare the results with a non-occupationally exposed population, and identify factors associated with higher blood metal levels. Four RSF were selected and 226 collectors were examined for their blood metal levels and associated factors. The mean concentration of Cd (arithmetic mean - AM: 0.47 mu gL(-1); geometric mean - GM: 0.34 mu gL(-1)) was almost four times higher than those found in a reference study. The generalized linear model (GLM) indicated that the RSF where the collectors work, work in another occupation, and smoking were statistically significant predictors of blood Cd levels. The Pb mean concentration (AM: 39.1.3 mu gL(-1) ; GM: 34.11 mu gL(-1)) was also higher than the observed in the reference study (about 1.4 times) and its associated factors in the GLM were the RSF where the collectors work, sex, smoking, age and meat consumption. The Hg mean concentration (AM: 1.46 mu gL(-1); GM: a 94 mu gL(-1)) was not significantly higher than the reference population and its associated factors were previous work in other RSF, fish consumption and years of work in the current RSF. This study indicates that recycling material collectors have higher blood Cd and Pb levels compared to the general population.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available