Annals of Occupational Hygiene Advance Access originally published online on January 31, 2005
Annals of Occupational Hygiene 2005 49(3):277; doi:10.1093/annhyg/meh104
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© 2005 British Occupational Hygiene Society Published by Oxford University Press;
Letter to the Editor |
Reply
Department of Food and Chemical Risk Analysis, TNO Chemistry, Zeist, The Netherlands, E-mail: preller{at}chemie.tno.nl
We agree that although we tried to adjust the PID reading for methylene chloride, this solvent is not measured by the PID. However, for the main findings of our studyhow to describe peak exposure profilesthis does not affect the results since the correlation between peak measures remains the same. There are at most two observations in which methylene chloride was present as measured with charcoal tubes. For the whole sampling period, the PID readings were adjusted with the same (wrong) correction factor, so the correlations as assessed by factor analysis are not affected.
The data on the absolute exposure levels will be somewhat biased. It is difficult to estimate how large the deviations are, but most likely they will be small.
![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us What's this?
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||