Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

APPENDIX C: HUMAN-CANCER RISK ASSASSMENT, BY MALCOLM C. PIKE
Pages 421-448

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 421...
... This is the relevant comparison, because the average BaP concentration in urban air in the United States in 1959 was roughly ~ ng/m -- a figure very close to that of rural North Wales in 1954. Dolls showed that Equation 2 provided an excellent fit to the combined nonsmoker data from Kahn1 and Hammond (see Table C-5)
From page 422...
... for the lungcancer mortality rate in this age group on the basis of the combined results of Kahn 9 and Hammond. 1 Other regression studies have similar problems, leaving them useless for quantitative risk assessment.
From page 423...
... The experiment of Neal and Rigdon,~8 referred to in Chapter 4, found that BaP administered to mice in their diet produced forestomach tumors. With the extrapolation procedure used by the National Research Council Safe Drinking Water Committee, it can be calculated that a C-13
From page 424...
... The estimated daily intake of PAHs in food is 10 times the intake of BaP (see Table 6-25) , so one would estimate the total lifetime cancer risk associated with exposure to BaP and other PAHs in food at something less than 10 times these figures.
From page 425...
... TABLE C-1 Lung-Cancer Mortality Ratios for Smokers of High-, Medium-, and Low-"Tar" Cigarettes$ 1960-1972a #ITarl1 Content, mg/cigarette High (30) Medium (22.5)
From page 426...
... Areas, 1952-1954, by Past Smoking Habitsa Lung-Cancer Rateb Smoking Category Rural Urban _ Nonsmokers 22 (2)
From page 427...
... TABLE C-3 Lung-Cancer Mortality Rates of Men, Aged 35-74, in Japan, by Area Pollution and Smoking Habitsa Lung-Cancer Rateb Low Pollution Smoking Category Intermediate High Pollution Pollution Nonsmokers 11.5 (5)
From page 428...
... TABLE C-4 Smoking Habits and Lung-Cancer Mortality Rates of Bri tish Gasworkers Non- Ex smokers, smokers, OF ~0 Population "Exposed" gasworkers Othe r gasworkers 8.3 10.2 a ~0 Cont inning Smokers, % Pipe Mixed 1-9 10-19 Lung Canc e r Cigarettes/d Mortality Ratea 6.7 4.4 18.1 38.5 13.9 5.8 15.3 5.9 6.2 17.8 35.5 13.4 aPer 100, 000 per year, standardized for age.
From page 429...
... S . Nonsmokersa Age, yr 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75-84 Annual Mortality Rate, per 100, 000 2.8 5.8 13.9 25.6 49.4 aReprinted with permission from Doll, 5 based on data from Kahnl9 and Hammond.l3 C-19
From page 430...
... TABLE C- 6 Estimates of Lifetime (7C yr) Lung-Cancer Risk from Exposure to BaP Source at 1 ng/m3 Study Populat ion Risk, per 100, 000 Li f e t ime Lung-Cance r Gasworkers 43 L iverpoo 1 North Wales Al 1 men Nonsmoke r s Nonsmokers S3 20 <61 C-20 Re ferenc e Doll _ al.6310 S tocks38 DollS
From page 431...
... CTumor initiation in SENCAR mice, papillomas/mouse per milligram of extract at 27 wk. dEnhancement of SA7 viral transformation in Syrian hamster embryo cells, transformations per 2 x 10~ cells per nanogram of extract per milliliter.
From page 432...
... TABLE C-8 Estimates of Potency of Organic Extracts from Various Sources of Air Pollution, Relative to Potency of Coke-Oven Extracta Viral SENCAR Trans- L5178Y Source BaP Mice formation . Coke oven 1 1 1 : 1 1.0 (gasworks)
From page 433...
... . Source Mice formation Coke oven (gasworks)
From page 434...
... TABLE C-10 Estimated Cumulative Lung-Cancer Incidence to Age 70 Due to Lifelong Exposure to Variou3s Pollutant Sources at BaP of 1 ng/m a Source Coke oven Caterpil tar 3304 D Oldsmobile 350 D Vo lkswagen Turbo D Mus tang 302 V-8, catalys t aBased on Table C-6 and L5178Y+ in Tabl C-24 Cumulative Incidence$ per 100$000 43 (0.043%)
From page 436...
... Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, 197 7.
From page 437...
... Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, 1977.
From page 438...
... Cancer in North Wales and Liverpool regions. Supplement to British Empire Cancer Campaign Annual Report, 1957.
From page 439...
... The rationale for public decision-making with respect to PAH emissions from atmospheric sources is explored first, followed by discussions of the general problems of developing the appropriate decision-making tools, deciding on appropriate levels of control, and choosing appropriate means of implementing the decisions. The principles developed are then applied to PAH emissions of various sources, within the constraints of the limited amount of information that is available.
From page 440...
... The control of an externality brings societal benefits: a reduction in the externality costs imposed on others. In the case of PAHs, reductions in PAR emissions that translate into reductions in human exposure to PAHs mean the avoidance of some premature deaths (frequently termed "the saving of lives")
From page 441...
... , stringency should be adjusted until the marginal benefits of extra stringency are just equal to the marginal costs The basic methods of cost-benefit analysis are, by now3 standard;13~3 D-3
From page 442...
... Similarly, society does not build pedes trian underpas ses for every busy urban intersection and does not station ambulances near those intersections, despite the reductions in mortality and morbidity that would be achieved. In effect, society has decided that the extra mortality and morbidity reductions are not worth the resources (costs)
From page 443...
... · The average (or some other summary measure) of the implicit values yielded by other, recent projects or programs involving mortality reduction.
From page 444...
... For example, to estimate the wage premium that accompanies extra risk, a researcher could collect a sample of wage rates for various occupat ions, the ac tuarial data on accidental deaths for those occupations, and data on the various influences on wage rates (e.g., degree of unionization, amount of education, extent of experience)
From page 445...
... Then, because each person, on average, should be willing to value this improvement at about $500 per year, the 1 million people in the community should be willing to pay about $500 million per year for these benefits, and this aggregate value could be compared with the anticipated cost of the program. In essence, the aggregate cost of the benefit is estimated by multiplying the typical person's valuation of the risk reduction by the number of persons involved (reduction in risk per person)
From page 446...
... If the agency wished to minimize the societal cost of achieving the emission reduction, it would try to have complete information about the total and marginal cost schedules for each of the various emitters and allocate reduction or emission appropriately, following the precepts of costeffectiveness analysis. At the other extreme, the agency could set an effluent fee that would require an emitter to pay a specified amount per unit of the pollutant that was emitted.
From page 447...
... But knowledge about the costs of control is rarely complete. With incomplete knowledge, the control agency is likely to make socially costly mistakes by improperly assigning excessive emission reductions to emitters with high marginal costs of control.
From page 448...
... Another method of control that retains most of the incentive properties of effluent fees, but also has some of the possible quantitative certainty of a fiat system, is a system of marketable emission permits.! Under this system, the central regulatory agency sets a target of maximal total emissions of a given pollutant.


This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.