Characterization of Formaldehyde Exposure Resulting from the Use of Four Professional Hair Straightening Products

Transcription

1 Characterization of Formaldehyde Exposure Resulting from the Use of Four Professional Hair Straightening Products Shannon H. Gaffney, Ph.D., CIH Cardno ChemRisk California Industrial Hygiene Council December 4, 2013 San Francisco, CA

2 Introduction > Formaldehyde has long been a component of homemade and professional hair straightening treatments > Hair proteins (keratins) are altered which results in semi-permanent straightening

3 Timeline* Mid- 2000s Oct Nov April 2011 May 2011 Sept Kera-n hair straightening products which were marketed as formaldehyde- free gained widespread acceptance in the U.S. Oregon OSHA receives complaint: breathing difficulty, nose bleeds and eye irrita-on in stylists Bulk sample analysis: % formaldehyde Air sampling: short term exposures > ACGIH & NIOSH recommended levels, just below OSHA OELs CA AWorney General filed a lawsuit against the manufacturers of the Brazilian Blowout for failing to warn consumers that the product contains a carcinogen OSHA releases Hazard Alert warning of poten-al formaldehyde exposure from using Brazilian Blowout NIOSH releases Health Hazard Evalua-on of hair salons using Brazilian Blowout. Bulk sample analysis: 11% formaldehyde Air sampling: short term exposures > ACGIH & NIOSH recommended levels, just below OSHA OELs The FDA issued a lewer to the makers of the Brazilian Blowout, iden-fying the product adulterated and misbranded * Events prior to the publica-on of our study

4 Background > Health effects potentially associated with exposure > Acute: eye and respiratory tract irritation Eye irritation: 0.1 to 0.5 ppm > Chronic: asthma/allergies, immunological and neurological conditions, cancer > Industry profile: Hairdressers and allied professionals > Large fast growing group (630,000 current, projected 18% growth by 2018) > Prolific use of various chemicals > Limited access to health and safety professionals > Employees possibly willing to take risk (compensation, lack of awareness)

5 Simulation Study Methods > Four different products were applied to separate human hair wigs mounted on mannequin heads > Professional stylist, trained in the use of all four products Brazilian Blowout, Global Keratin, Coppola, La Brasiliana > Three step process: 1. Application: hair was sectioned with a comb and clips, ~2 oz of product was applied using an applicator 2. Blow dry: using a handheld blow dryer and a brush 3. Flat iron: each section of hair was flat ironed multiple times (450 F)

6 Sampling Location and Methods > Hair salon, downtown Chicago (260 m 3 )

7 Sampling Scheme Sample Type Loca-on Dura-on Min Ac-ve v. Passive Personal Area Stylist & Mannequin BZ m 2 3 m 6 10 m Task Blow dry Flat iron Treatment Study Treatment Study Ac-ve Ac-ve Passive Ac-ve Passive Real-time sampling: Stylist work area and 6-10 m Logged every 5 minutes Bulk sampling

8 Methods > Active: > 2,4-DNPH silica gel sorbent tubes > Analyzed in accordance with NIOSH 2016 HPLC-UV > Passive samples: > Collected on N571 Aldehyde Passive Monitors > Analyzed in accordance with NIOSH 2016 > Real time monitoring: > Collected using a MIRAN SapphIRe > Bulk samples > Analyzed in accordance with NIOSH 3500 Visual absorption spectrometry

9 OELs for Formaldehyde Agency Averaging Time Concentra-on OSHA 8- hr 0.75 ppm NIOSH 8- hr ppm OSHA 15 min 2 ppm NIOSH 15 min (Ceiling) 0.1 ppm ACGIH Ceiling 0.3 ppm 8-hr TWA: OSHA PEL is 47-fold higher than the NIOSH REL Short Term: OSHA STEL is 20-fold higher than the NIOSH REL-C OSHA STEL is 6-fold higher than the ACGIH TLV-C

10 Task-Based > Blow dry > Flat iron > Blow dry: 0.08 to 3.47 ppm > Flat iron: 0.08 to 1.11 ppm > Blow dry > Flat iron > Blow dry: 0.08 to 3.47 ppm > Flat iron: 0.08 to 1.11 ppm

11 Treatment-Based Personal Area (0.5 1 m) Area (2 3 m) Area (6 10 m) Mean concentrations: For Brazilian Blowout and Global Keratin all locations > REL-C and TLV-C For Coppola and La Brasiliana were generally below the short term limits None exceeded the OSHA STEL

12 Study-Duration Personal Area (0.5 1 m) Area (2 3 m) Area (6 10 m) > Mean concentrations: > Ranged from 0.25 ppm (reception) to 0.43 ppm (stylist) > Were above the REL and REL-C, and below the PEL at all locations > Were above the ACGIH TLV-C in the BZ of the stylist and mannequin and at the closest bystander locations (0.5-1m)

13 Real Time > Used to ensure that formaldehyde concentrations returned to background in between treatments > The TLV-C was exceeded for all products except La Brasiliana > The measurements were highly consistent with the active sampling (R 2 = 0.88)

14 Bulk Sampling Concentra-on of Formaldehyde (%) Labeled as Formaldehyde Free 11.5 Labeled as <4% Formaldehyde Brazilian Blowout Global Kera-n Coppola La Brasiliana > The concentration in solution was found to be a significant predictor of airborne formaldehyde levels (p = 0.015) > According to OSHA formaldehyde must be listed on a product s label and MSDS: > If it is in the product at 0.1% or more (as a gas or in solution) > Or if the product releases formaldehyde above 0.1 ppm > At 0.5 ppm, the label should contain Potential Cancer Hazard

15 Conclusions and Recommendations > Professional keratin treatments even those labeled as formaldehyde free have the potential to produce airborne levels that meet or exceed current OELs > Given the widespread use of these products, and the limited number of products tested, a market survey involving analyses of additional products would be timely

16 Acknowledgments > No funding was received for this study > Thank you to Anders Abelmann, Lauren Spicer, Rebecca Adams, Kari Neier, Meghan Glynn, Brent Finley and Jennifer Pierce for their assistance in conducting the study > Thank you to the salon manager and stylist for their participation in the simulation study

17 Thank you!