Nanosized aerosols from consumer sprays: experimental analysis and exposure modeling for four commercial products
Source abstract
Abstract
Consumer spray products are already on the market in the cosmetics and household sector, which suggest by their label that they contain engineered nanoparticles (ENP). Sprays are considered critical for human health, because the lungs represent a major route for the uptake of ENP into the human body. To contribute to the exposure assessment of ENP in consumer spray products, we analyzed ENP in four commercially available sprays: one antiperspirant, two shoe impregnation sprays, and one plant-strengthening agent. The spray dispersions were analyzed by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICPMS) and (scanning-) transmission electron microscopy ((S)TEM). Aerosols were generated by using the original vessels, and analyzed by scanning mobility particle sizer (SMPS) and (S)TEM. On the basis of SMPS results, the nanosized aerosol depositing in the respiratory tract was modeled for female and male consumers. The derived exposure levels reflect a single spray application. We identified ENP in the dispersions of two products (shoe impregnation and plant spray). Nanosized aerosols were observed in three products that contained propellant gas. The aerosol number concentration increased linearly with the sprayed amount, with the highest concentration resulting from the antiperspirant. Modeled aerosol exposure levels were in the range of 1010 nanosized aerosol components per person and application event for the antiperspirant and the impregnation sprays, with the largest fraction of nanosized aerosol depositing in the alveolar region. Negligible exposure from the application of the plant spray (pump spray) was observed.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Aerosol Filtration and Electrostatic Precipitation · Air Quality and Health Impacts · Inhalation and Respiratory Drug Delivery
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (36)
Show source-provided references
1. Aalto P, Hämeri K, Paatero P, Kulmala M, Bellander T, Berglind N, Bouso L, Castano-Vinyals, Sunyer J, Cattani G et al (2005) Aerosol number concentration measurements in five European cities using TSI-3022 condensation particle counter over a three-year period during health effects of air pollution on susceptible subpopulation. J Air Waste Manage Assoc 55(8):1064–107610.1080/10473289.2005.10464702 ↗
2. Berger-Preiss E, Koch W, Behnke W, Gerling S, Kock H, Elflein L, Appel KE (2004) In-flight spraying in aircrafts: determination of the exposure scenario. Int J Hyg Environ Health 207(5):419–43010.1078/1438-4639-00310 ↗
3. Berger-Preiss E, Boehncke A, Koennecker G, Mangelsdorf I, Holthenrich D, Koch W (2005) Inhalational and dermal exposures during spray application of biocides. Int J Hyg Environ Health 208(5):357–37210.1016/j.ijheh.2005.04.006 ↗
4. Berger-Preiss E, Koch W, Gerling S, Kock H, Klasen J, Hoffmann G, Appel KE (2006) Aircraft disinsection: exposure assessment and evaluation of a new pre- embarkation method. Int J Hyg Environ Health 209(1):41–5610.1016/j.ijheh.2005.08.009 ↗
5. Buonanno G, Morawska L, Stabile L (2009) Particle emission factors during cooking activities. Atmos Environ 43(20):3235–324210.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.03.044 ↗
6. De Jong WH, Hagens WI, Krystek P, Burger MC, Sips AJAM, Geertsma RE (2008) Particle size-dependent organ distribution of gold nanoparticles after intravenous administration. Biomaterials 29(12):1912–191910.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.12.037 ↗
7. Dhawan A, Sharma V, Parmar D (2009) Nanomaterials: a challenge for toxicologists. Nanotoxicology 3(1):1–910.1080/17435390802578595 ↗
8. ECHA (2008) Guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment. Chapter R.15. In: Consumer exposure estimation. Version 1.1 Available from the website http://guidance.echa.europa.eu/docs/guidance_document/information_requirements_en.htm . Accessed May 2010
9. Engelund B, Sørensen H (2005) Mapping and health assessment of chemical substances in shoe care products. Danish Ministry of the Environment. Environmental Protection Agency. Survey of Chemical Substances in Consumer Products. No. 52 2005
10. Fierz M, Kaegi R, Burtscher H (2007) Theoretical and experimental evaluation of a portable electrostatic TEM sampler. Aerosol Sci Technol 41(5):520–52810.1080/02786820701253327 ↗
11. Hagendorfer H, Lorenz C, Kaegi R, Sinnet B, Gehrig R, Goetz Nv, Scheringer M, Ludwig C, Ulrich A (2010) Size-fractionated characterization and quantification of nanoparticle release rates from a consumer spray product containing engineered nanoparticles. J Nanopart Res 12(7):2481–249410.1007/s11051-009-9816-6 ↗
12. ICRP Publication 66 (1994) Human respiratory tract model for radiological protection. A report of a Task Group of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Ann ICRP 24(1–3):1–482
13. Kreyling WG, Semmler-Behnke M, Möller W (2006) Health implications of nanoparticles. J Nanopart Res 8(5):543–56210.1007/s11051-005-9068-z ↗
14. Lanone S, Rogerieux F, Geys J, Dupont A, Maillot-Marechal E, Boczkowski J, Lacroix G, Hoet P (2009) Comparative toxicity of 24 manufactured nanoparticles in human alveolar epithelial and macrophage cell lines. Part Fibre Toxicol 6(14):1–12
15. Matson U (2005) Indoor and Outdoor concentration of ultrafine particles in some Scandinavian rural and urban areas. Sci Tot Environ 343(1–3):169–17610.1016/j.scitotenv.2004.10.002 ↗
16. Maynard A (2006) Nanotechnology: assessing the risks. Nanotoday 1(2):22–3310.1016/S1748-0132(06)70045-7 ↗
17. Maynard A, Aitken RJ (2007) Assessing exposure to airborne nanomaterials: current abilities and future requirements. Nanotoxicology 1(1):26–4110.1080/17435390701314720 ↗
18. Müller L, Riediker M, Wick P, Mohr M, Gehr P, Rothen-Rutishauser B (2010) Oxidative stress and inflammation response after nanoparticle exposure: differences between human lung cell monocultures and an advanced three-dimensional model of the human epithelial airways. J R Soc Interface 7(6):S27–S4010.1098/rsif.2009.0161.focus ↗
19. Nanoforum (2006) European Nanotechnology Gateway. Nanoforum Report: Nanotechnology in consumer products. 9th General Report. Available from the website: http://www.nanoforum.org . Accessed October 2006
20. Nanotechproject (2008) Woodrow Wilson International Centre for Scholars. Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies. Consumer products inventory of nanotechnology Products. Available from the website: http://www.nanotechproject.org/inventories/consumer/analysis_draft/ . Accessed August 2009
21. Nielsen E (2008) Nanotechnology and its impact on Consumers. EBN Consulting. Report to the Consumer Council of Canada. Available from the website: http://www.consumercouncil.com/index.cfm?pid=20399 . Accessed July 2009
22. Oberdörster G, Maynard A, Donaldson K, Castranova V, Fitzpatrick J, Ausman K, Carter J, Karn B, Kreyling W, Lai D, Olin S, Monteiro-Riviere N, Warheit D, Yang H (2005) Principles for characterizing the potential human health effects from exposure to nanomaterials: elements of a screening strategy. Part Fibre Toxicol 2(8):1–35
23. Oberdörster G, Stone V, Donaldsen K (2007) Toxicology of nanoparticles: a historical perspective. Nanotoxicology 1(1):2–2510.1080/17435390701314761 ↗
24. RIVM report 320104001/2006 (2006) Cosmetics Fact Sheet to assess the risks for the consumer. Updated version for ConsExpo 4
25. Rogers RE, Isola DA, Jeng C-J, Levebvre A, Smith LW (2005) Simulated inhalation levels of fragrance materials in a surrogate air freshener formulation. Environ Sci Technol 39(20):7810–781610.1021/es040534q ↗
26. Semmler-Behnke M, Kreyling WG, Lipka J, Fertsch S, Wenk A, Takenaka S, Schmid G, Brandau W (2008) Biodistribution of 1.4- and 18-nm gold particles in rats. Small 4(12):2108–211110.1002/smll.200800922 ↗
27. Shin JA, Lee EJ, Seo SM, Kim HS, Kang JL, Park EM (2010) Nanosized titanium dioxide enhanced inflammatory responses in the septic brain of mouse. Neuroscience 31(1):99–105
28. Trudel D, Horowitz L, Wormuth M, Scheringer M, Cousins I, Hungerbühler K (2008) Estimating consumer exposure to PFOS and PFOA. Risk Anal 28(2):251–26910.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01017.x ↗
29. United States Environmental Protection Agency, USEPA (1997) Exposure factors handbook. August 1997
30. Vernez D, Bruzzi R, Kupferschmidt H, De-Batz A, Droz P, Lazor R (2006) Acute respiratory syndrome after inhalation of waterproofing sprays: a posteriori exposure-response assessment in 102 cases. J Occup Environ Hyg 3(5):250–26110.1080/15459620600628845 ↗
31. Wallace LA, Emmerich SJ, Howard-Reed C (2004) Source strengths of ultrafine and fine particles due to cooking with a gas stove. Environ Sci Technol 38(8):2304–231110.1021/es0306260 ↗
32. Willeke K, Baron PA (1993) Aerosol measurement: principles, techniques, and applications. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York ISBN 0-442-00486-9
33. Wittmaack K (2007) In search of the most relevant parameter for quantifying lung inflammatory response to nanoparticle exposure: particle number, surface area, or what? Environ Health Perspect 115(2):187–19410.1289/ehp.9254 ↗
34. Wu J, Liu W, Xue C, Thou S, Lan F, Bi L, Xu H, Yang X, Zeng FD (2009) Toxicity and penetration of TiO2 nanoparticles in hairless mice and porcine skin after subchronic dermal exposure. Toxicol Lett 191(1):1–810.1016/j.toxlet.2009.05.020 ↗
35. Yamashita M, Takana J, Yamashita M, Hirai H, Suzuki M, Kajigaya H (1997) Mist particle diameters are related to the toxicity of waterproofing sprays: comparison between toxic and non-toxic products. Vet Hum Toxicol 39(2):71–74
36. Zhu Y, Pudota J, Collins D, Allen D, Clements A, DenBleyker A, Fraser M, Jia Y, McDonald-Buller E, Michel E (2009) Air pollutant concentrations near three Texas roadways, Part I: ultrafine particles. Atmos Environ 43:4513–452210.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.04.018 ↗