4.7 Article

Exposure to toxic waste containing high concentrations of hydrogen sulphide illegally dumped in Abidjan, Cte d'Ivoire

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
卷 19, 期 8, 页码 3192-3199

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-012-0823-2

关键词

Abidjan; Toxic waste; Sampling by transects; Hydrogen sulphide; Exposure

资金

  1. World Health Organization (WHO) country office in Abidjan, Cote d'Ivoire
  2. Cote d'Ivoire Government Committee of Toxic Waste
  3. Ministry of Health in Cote d'Ivoire
  4. Centre Suisse de Recherches Scientifiques in Cote d'Ivoire (CSRS)
  5. Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute (Swiss TPH)
  6. programme NCCR North-South

向作者/读者索取更多资源

On August 2006, a cargo ship illegally dumped 500 t of toxic waste containing high concentrations of hydrogen sulphide in numerous sites across Abidjan. Thousands of people became ill. Seventeen deaths were associated with toxic waste exposure. This study reports on environmental and health problems associated with the incident. A cross-sectional transect study was conducted in five waste dumping site areas. Of the households, 62.1% (n = 502) were exposed to the effects of the pollutants and 51.1% of the interviewed people (n = 2,368) in these households showed signs of poisoning. Most important symptoms were cough (37.1%), asthenia (33.1%), pruritus (29.9%) and nausea (29.1%). The health effects showed different frequencies in the five waste impact sites. Among the poisoned persons, 21.1% (n = 532) presented symptoms on the survey day (i.e., 4 months after incident). Transect sampling allowed to determine a radius of vulnerability to exposure of up to 3 km from the point of toxic waste disposal. The area of higher vulnerability is influenced by various environmental factors, such as size and severity of pollution site, duration of toxic waste pollution on the impact site and locally climatic conditions. The surveillance of effects on environment and human health is warranted to monitor the development.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据