• Journal of Environmental Health Sciences
• /
• v.48 no.1
• /
• pp.1-8
• /
• 2022

Objectives: The purpose of this study is to reveal the circumstances under which the cases of harm to health caused by humidifier disinfectant were neglected and show the points where the number of victims and the degree of damage could have been reduced. In addition, it attempts to describe how damage management proceeded immediately after the incident and actually exacerbated the damage. Finally, it explores the unfortunate aspects of the recent trial. By doing so, it attempts to take this as an opportunity to consider whether a tragic event such as the humidifier disinfectant incident could occur in the future. Methods: This study collected and analyzed data on chemical material characteristics related to humidifier disinfectants, data on health effect characteristics, data on related laws and regulations from the Ministry of Environment, data related to the damage investigation by the Korea Environmental Industry and Technology Institute, and current contents. Results: The lack of related systems and laws is the area where the greatest responsibility for the cause of the humidifier disinfectant disaster falls, so it is difficult for the government to escape this responsibility. Establishing a dedicated department to identify the prevalence of certain diseases within the functions of the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service to monitor health can greatly contribute to the prevention and management of diseases through early detection and management of group outbreaks caused by harmful factors. Humidifier disinfectant damage relief should have been expanded earlier beyond HDLI (humidifier disinfectant lung injury) to include non-specific diseases such as asthma, pneumonia, and interstitial pneumonia. The scope of relief benefits should have also been expanded earlier to include the payment of disability benefits. Fortunately, with the 2020 revision of the Special Act, the conditions for estimating causal relations were eased and individual screening systems such as health impact assessment were reorganized along with the introduction of a rapid screening system. Conclusions: The management system for chemical substances in a country is clearly of paramount importance, and the ministry in charge must have a response system in case of damage to health effects. Administration that looks at the victims' situation from their point of view is needed, and technical countermeasures are required to quickly recognize the prevalence of certain diseases.

• Food Science of Animal Resources
• /
• v.28 no.5
• /
• pp.555-561
• /
• 2008

Ninety-nine samples of powdered infant formula in a market were collected from the local market and their contaminations for total aerobic bacteria, coliform, FAO/WHO Category A, B, and C pathogens were analyzed. Total aerobic bacteria were detected in 92 of 99 samples (93%) at levels of $1.83{\pm}0.68\;Log\;MPN/g$. These levels were below legal levels specified for infant formulas except for one sample detected by 4.5 Log CFU/g. Coliform was detected in 12 of 99 samples (12%) at levels of $1.26{\pm}1.03\;Log\;MPN/g$ whereas non-detection was required according to the specification of coliform in infant formulas. Escherichia coli was detected in 1 of 99 samples by 0.48 Log MPN/g. Salmonella and Enterobacter sakazakii among Category A weren't detected in all the samples. Enterobacteriaceae, Category B group, were detected in 25 samples of total 99 samples (25%) by $0.83{\pm}1.37\;Log\;MPN/g$. Enterobacteriaceae identified by API 20E were Escherichia vulneris, Es. hermannii, Pantoea spp., Citrobacter koseri, Klebsiella pneumoniae, En. cloaceae. Bacillus cereus among Category C was highly detected in 29 of 99 samples (29%) at levels of $0.69{\pm}0.32\;Log\;MPN/g$ with the most probable number count method, which were below legal levels for the specification of B. cereus in infant formulas. Clostridium perfringens, E. coli O157, Staphyloccus aureus, Listeria monocytogenes, Yersinia enterocolitica, and Campylobacter jejuni/coli were not detected. Contamination level of major pathogens was low and falls within the range of specification of infant formulas. However, Enterobacteriaceae and B.cereus showed the high prevalence and some Enterobacteriaceae causing disease were detected. Therefore, it is necessary to monitor the potential pathogens continually and reduce them to improve the microbial quality of non-sterilized powdered infant formulas.

• The Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology
• /
• v.23 no.2
• /
• pp.51-58
• /
• 2019

Purpose In in-vitro laboratories of nuclear medicine department, when the reagent lot or reagent lot changes Comparability test or parallel test is performed to determine whether the results between lots are reliable. The most commonly used standard domestic laboratories is to obtain %difference from the difference in results between two lots of reagents, and then many laboratories are set the standard to less than 20% at low concentrations and less than 10% at medium and high concentrations. If the range is deviated from the standard, the test is considered failed and it is repeated until the result falls within the standard range. In this study, several tests are selected that are performed in nuclear medicine in-vitro laboratories to analyze parallel test results and to establish criteria for customized percent difference for each test. Materials and Methods From January to November 2018, the result of parallel test for reagent lot change is analyzed for 7 items including thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH), free thyroxine (FT4), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), CA-125, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), HBs-Ab and Insulin. The RIA-MAT 280 system which adopted the principle of IRMA is used for TSH, FT4, CEA, CA-125 and PSA. TECAN automated dispensing equipment and GAMMA-10 is used to measure insulin test. For the test of HBs-Ab, HAMILTON automated dispensing equipment and Cobra Gamma ray measuring instrument are used. Separate reagent, customized calibrator and quality control materials are used in this experiment. Results 1. TSH [%diffrence Max / Mean / Median] (P-value by t-test > 0.05) C-1(low concentration) [14.8 / 4.4 / 3.7 / 0.0 ] C-2(middle concentration) [10.1 / 4.2 / 3.7 / 0.0] 2. FT4 [%diffrence Max / Mean / Median] (P-value by t-test > 0.05) C-1(low concentration) [10.0 / 4.2 / 3.9 / 0.0] C-2(high concentration) [9.6 / 3.3 / 3.1 / 0.0 ] 3. CA-125 [%diffrence Max / Mean / Median] (P-value by t-test > 0.05) C-1(middle concentration) [9.6 / 4.3 / 4.3 / 0.3] C-2(high concentration) [6.5 / 3.5 / 4.3 / 0.4] 4. CEA [%diffrence Max / Mean / median] (P-value by t-test > 0.05) C-1(low concentration) [9.8 / 4.2 / 3.0 / 0.0] C-2(middle concentration) [8.7 / 3.7 / 2.3 / 0.3] 5. PSA [%diffrence Max / Mean / Median] (P-value by t-test > 0.05) C-1(low concentration) [15.4 / 7.6 / 8.2 / 0.0] C-2(middle concentration) [8.8 / 4.5 / 4.8 / 0.9] 6. HBs-Ab [%diffrence Max / Mean / Median] (P-value by t-test > 0.05) C-1(middle concentration) [9.6 / 3.7 / 2.7 / 0.2] C-2(high concentration) [8.9 / 4.1 / 3.6 / 0.3] 7. Insulin [%diffrence Max / Mean / Median] (P-value by t-test > 0.05) C-1(middle concentration) [8.7 / 3.1 / 2.4 / 0.9] C-2(high concentration) [8.3 / 3.2 / 1.5 / 0.1] In some low concentration measurements, the percent difference is found above 10 to nearly 15 percent in result of target value calculated at a lower concentration. In addition, when the value is measured after Standard level 6, which is the highest value of reagents in the dispensing sequence, the result would have been affected by a hook effect. Overall, there was no significant difference in lot change of quality control material (p-value>0.05). Conclusion Variations between reagent lots are not large in immunoradiometric assays. It is likely that this is due to the selection of items that have relatively high detection rate in the immunoradiometric method and several remeasurements. In most test results, the difference was less than 10 percent, which was within the standard range. TSH control level 1 and PSA control level 1, which have low concentration target value, exceeded 10 percent more than twice, but it did not result in a value that was near 20 percent. As a result, it is required to perform a longer period of observation for more homogenized average results and to obtain laboratory-specific acceptance criteria for each item. Also, it is advised to study observations considering various variables.