Case Study

   Part 1: Pitfall Rate Condition Study Directions: After lection the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention condition con-over strong, defense the aftercited questions.  Case Study: “Cross-sectional Pitfall Rate of Environmental Contaminants in Churchill County, Nevada” by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.t   1) Identify the personation:_____________________________________________________ 2) What sign of personation is forcible?  ___biological  ___chemical 3) Source:  ____anthropogenic  _____non-anthropogenic  ____area  _____point ____stationary  _____mobile ____indoor _____outdoor 4) Transport/carrier medium:  ___air  ___water ___soil  ___dust  ___stay effect item 5) Pitfall pathways:  ___eating tainted stay  ___breathing tainted air  ___touching a tainted surface ___drinking tainted infiltrate 6) Pitfall concentration:  ___mg/kg (food)  ___mg/litre (water) ___ug/m3 (air)  ___ug/cm3 (tainted surfaces)  ___% by ponderosity  ___fibres/m3 (air)  7) Pitfall route:  ___inhalation  ___dermal contact  ___ingestion  ___multiple routes 8) Pitfall quantity:  ___continuous  ____intermittent  ___cyclic  ____random  ___rare 9) Pitfall space:  ___seconds   ___minutes  ___hours  ___days ___weeks   ___months  ___years  ___lifetime 10) Pitfall setting:  ___occupational  ____non-occupational  ___residential ____non-residential  ___indoors  ____outdoors 11) Exposed population:  ____general population  ____population subgroups  ____individuals 12) Geographic scope:  ___site  ___specific ___local  ___regional  ___national  ___international  ___global  Part 2: Risk Assessment Directions: Use the condition con-over strong to collect defenses to the aftercited questions. Case Study: “Illness Associated delay Drift of Chloropicrin Soil Fumigant into a Residential Area—Kern County, California, 2003,”  1. Issue Identification a. What is causing the verified substance?  b. Why is the substance a substance? c. How was the substance initially verified? d. What are the general perceptions of the venture? 2. Venture Identification a. What signs of unconducive bloom proceeds effectiveness be caused by the substance? b. How quickly and for what space effectiveness the substance be practiced? 3. Dose Response Assessment  a. Evaluate twain redundant and adventitious toxicity instruction to affect the stroke of unconducive proceeds occurring in humans at opposed pitfall levels. 4. Pitfall Rate for the Relevant Population  a. Determine the quantity, body, degree, space, and quality of pitfalls to the venture. 5. Risk Characterization a. Detail the disposition and immanent stroke of proceeds for the pitfall provisions forcible in the pitfall rate.  Helpful conjoin on Risk Assessment:  http://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/risk-assessment/document/hrsguide2001.pdf