Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Classic Paper
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
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 ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by RAPPAPORT, S. M.
Right arrow Articles by FLYNN, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by RAPPAPORT, S. M.
Right arrow Articles by FLYNN, M.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Ann. occup. Hyg., Vol. 47, No. 5, pp. 343-348, 2003
© 2003 British Occupational Hygiene Society
Published by Oxford University Press

Commentary: Two Seminal Contributions of S. A. Roach to the Evaluation and Control of Hazardous Substances in Air

S. M. RAPPAPORT and M. FLYNN

School of Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7431, USA

Received 18 February 2003; in final form 1 March 2003

S. A. Roach was a pioneer in the assessment and control of hazardous substances in the working environment during the second half of the 20th century. The two papers discussed in this commentary are generally regarded as his most important scientific contributions. The first paper (Roach, 1977) dealt with the determinants of the body burdens of toxic air contaminants. Using simple kinetic models, he showed how levels of toxicants rise and fall in the body according to the patterns of airborne exposures received during relevant time windows. This led to several useful rules of thumb, including the timing of grab samples for ‘fast acting’ substances, the appropriate duration of air samples relative to the biological half time, how to deal with unusual work schedules, and how to integrate exposure assessment with control. He also offered sage advice regarding the meaning and interpretation of exposure limits, the importance of repeated monitoring, and the extent to which unacceptable levels of exposure might be reduced. In concluding this work, Roach emphasized that the hygienist can fulfill a central role in occupational health simply by intervening to reduce the body burden. The second paper (Roach, 1981) dealt with the design of effective ventilation systems to control worker exposure to toxic airborne contaminants. By developing a series of simple differential equations, Roach evaluated the impact of turbulent diffusion upon industrial ventilation. He emphasized that the stationary contaminant concentration was proportional to the contaminant generation rate and that velocity alone was not a sufficient design criterion to control exposures. Rather, he argued that the equivalent ventilation rate (the ratio of the contaminant generation rate to the steady concentration in the breathing zone) should be the guiding criterion for ventilation design. Throughout both papers, Roach used fundamental principles to tie together exposure assessment and engineering control, and pointed the way to a science for occupational hygiene. The profession can still learn a great deal from these seminal contributions.

Keywords: air contaminants; air turbulence; body burden; control; exposure; ventilation


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Occup. Environ. Med.Home page
D. Kriebel, H. Checkoway, and N. Pearce
Exposure and dose modelling in occupational epidemiology
Occup. Environ. Med., July 1, 2007; 64(7): 492 - 498.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ANN OCCUP HYGHome page
T. CARTER
British Occupational Hygiene Practice 1720-1920
Ann. Hyg., June 1, 2004; 48(4): 299 - 307.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.