4.6 Article

Environmental exposure to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, kitchen ventilation, fractional exhaled nitric oxide, and risk of diabetes among Chinese females

Journal

INDOOR AIR
Volume 28, Issue 3, Pages 383-393

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ina.12453

Keywords

cooking oil fumes; diabetes; females; fractional exhaled nitric oxide; kitchen ventilation; polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons

Funding

  1. Public Sector Program of National Environmental Protection of the People's Republic of China, [201409081]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [91543207]
  3. National Key Research and Development Plan of China [2016YFC1303903]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Diabetes is related to exposure to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), inflammation in the body, and housing characters. However, associations of urinary monohydroxy-PAHs (OH-PAHs) or fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) with diabetes risk in relation to housing characters are unclear. In this study, 2645 individuals were drawn from the baseline survey of the Wuhan-Zhuhai Cohort Study. Associations of diabetes with urinary OH-PAHs or FeNO among cooking participants were estimated using logistic regression models. Among women with self-cooking meals, urinary OH-PAH levels were positively associated with diabetes risk (P<.05); the cooking women with high FeNO (25ppb) had a 59% increase in the risk of diabetes (OR: 1.59, 95% CI: 1.06, 2.38), compared with those with low FeNO (<25ppb). The cooking women with use of kitchen exhaust fans/hoods had a 52% decrease in the risk of diabetes (OR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.27, 0.84), compared with those with nonuse of kitchen exhaust fans/hoods. The results indicated that the cooking women had an elevated risk of diabetes, which may be partly explained by an increase in the PAH body burden and higher inflammatory responses. Use of kitchen exhaust fan/hood can be associated with a lower risk of diabetes.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available