This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Marshall, L.
Right arrow Articles by Sanborn, M. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Marshall, L.
Right arrow Articles by Sanborn, M. D.
CMAJ • October 1, 2002; 167 (7)
© 2002 Canadian Medical Association or its licensors

Letters
Correspondance

Occupational and environmental exposure

Lynn Marshall*, Erica Weir{dagger}, Alan Abelsohn{ddagger} and Margaret D. Sanborn§

*Environmental Health Clinic, Sunnybrook & Women's College Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ont.; {dagger}Community Medicine Resident, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.; {ddagger}Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont.; §Department of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.

We thank Michael Schweigert for his attention to our article1 and for raising some interesting questions. Our primary intent was to suggest organizing principles to aid the physician in taking a comprehensive environmental history. We also wished to illustrate the weighing of evidence and a precautionary approach to guide decision-making in the many (if not most) real-life clinical situations where incomplete objective evidence is available.2 For this purpose we used a composite case example, closely based on actual cases.

The example illustrates the physician weighing the evidence for and against a symptom–exposure association and possibilities for intervention, and deciding that the combined weight of evidence was sufficient to recommend a trial removal of the photocopier (Table 1).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 1.

 

We appreciate that there are differing views as to what constitutes reasonable accommodation. This is particularly so in some modern workplaces where people are share space and have diminished control over their environment. Employers have faced liability when reasonable accommodation was not made.8 If an employer was reluctant or unable to accommodate the employee's need, or if the employee's symptoms did not improve with the trial intervention, then the cost of further clinical and workplace investigations could be justified. In this example, the employer was immediately accommodating (also reinforcing to his employee that she was valued), and the experiment was successful, with beneficial results for the employee's health and productivity.

Lynn Marshall Environmental Health Clinic Sunnybrook & Women's College Health Sciences Centre Toronto, Ont. Erica Weir Community Medicine Resident Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics McMaster University Hamilton, Ont. Alan Abelsohn Department of Family and Community Medicine University of Toronto Toronto, Ont. Margaret D. Sanborn Department of Family Medicine McMaster University Hamilton, Ont.

References

  1. Marshall L, Weir E, Abelsohn A, Sanborn MD. Identifying and managing adverse environmental health effects: 1. Taking an exposure history. CMAJ 2002;166(8):1049-55.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. The health and environment handbook for health professionals. Ottawa: Health Canada; 1998. p. 19-23. Available: www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ehp/ehd/catalogue/bch_pubs/98ehd211/98ehd211.htm (accessed 2002 July 3).
  3. Stenberg B, Eriksson N, Hoog J, Sundell J, Wall S. The sick buiding syndrome (SBS) in office workers. A case referent study of personal, psychosocial and building-related risk indicators. Int J Epidemiol 1994;23(6):1190-7. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  4. Tuomi T, Engstrom B, Niemela R, Svinhufvud J, Reijula K. Emission of ozone and organic volatiles from a selection of laser printers and photocopiers. Appl Occup Environ Hyg 2000;15 (8): 629-34.[Medline]
  5. Paz C. Some consequences of ozone exposure on health [review].Arch Med Res 1997;28(2):163-70. [Medline]
  6. Daly AK, Cholerton S, Armstrong M, Idle JR. Genotyping for polymorphisms in xenobiotic metabolism as a predictor of disease susceptibility. Environ Health Perspect 1994;102(Suppl 9): 55-61.
  7. Rosenstock L, Cullen MR, editors. Textbook of clinical occupational and environmental medicine. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company; 1994. p. 11.
  8. Fink S. Health authority failed to protect radiographer from x-ray fumes [case note]. Saf Health Pract 1996;July:38-40.



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J Am Board Fam MedHome page
S. J. Genuis and S. K. Genuis
Human Exposure Assessment and Relief From Neuropsychiatric Symptoms: Case Study of a Hairdresser
J Am Board Fam Med, March 1, 2004; 17(2): 136 - 141.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Marshall, L.
Right arrow Articles by Sanborn, M. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Marshall, L.
Right arrow Articles by Sanborn, M. D.