A case-comparison interview study of brain tumors and employment in occupations with presumed electric and magnetic field exposures

Results from epidemiologic studies suggest that persons working in occupations with presumed electric and magnetic field (EMF) exposures are at increased risk of brain cancer. This study utilized data from a completed, population-based, interview case-control study of central nervous system (CNS) tumors and employment in the petrochemical industry to test the hypothesis that employment in EMF-related occupations increases CNS tumor risk. A total of 375 male residents of the Texas-Louisiana Gulf Coast Area, age 20 to 79, with primary neuroglial CNS tumors diagnosed during the period 1980-84 were identified. A population-based comparison group of 450 age, race and geographically matched males was selected. Occupational histories and potential risk factor data were collected via personal interviews with study subjects or their next-of-kin.^ Adjusted odds ratios were less than 1.0 for persons ever employed in an electrical occupation (OR = 0.65; 95% CI = 0.40-1.09) or whose usual occupation was electrical (OR = 0.76; 95% CI = 0.33-1.73). Relative risk estimates did not increase significantly as time since first employment or duration of employment increased. Examination of CNS tumor risk by high (OR = 0.80), medium (OR = 0.88) and low (OR = 0.45) exposure categories for persons whose usual occupation was electrical did not indicate a dose-response pattern. In addition, the mean age of exposed cases was not significantly younger than that for unexposed cases. Analysis of risk by probability of exposure to EMFs showed non-significant elevations in the adjusted odds ratio for definite exposed workers defined by their usual occupation (OR = 1.78; 95% CI = 0.70-4.51) and ever/never employed status (OR = 1.54; 95% CI = 0.17-4.91).^ These findings suggest that employment in occupations with presumed EMF exposures does not increase CNS tumor risk as was suggested by previous investigations. The results of this study also do not support the EMF-tumor promotion hypothesis. ^

ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURES AND LUNG CANCER RISK AMONG WOMEN IN HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS, 1977-1980 (OCCUPATION, SMOKING, BYSTANDER)

Excessively high, accelerating lung cancer rates among women in Harris County, Texas, prompted this case-comparison study. Objectives were to compare patterns of employment, indirect exposures, and sociodemographic variables of lung cancer cases with comparison subjects (compeers) after standardizing for possible confounders, such as age and cigarette smoking. Lung cancer cases were microscopically confirmed, white, Harris County residents. Compeers, chosen from Medicare records and Texas Department of Public Safety records, were matched on gender, race, age, resident and vital status. Personal interviews were conducted with study subjects or next-of-kin. Industries and occupations were categorized as high risk, based on previous studies.^ Almost all cases (95.0%) and 60.0% of compeers smoked cigarettes. The odds ratio for lung cancer and smoking is 13.9. Stopping smoking between ages 30-50 years carries a lower risk than stopping at age 58 or more years. Women's employment in a high risk industry or occupation results in consistently elevated, smoking-adjusted odds ratios. Frequency and duration of employment demonstrate a moderate dose-response effect. A temporal association exists with employment in a high risk occupation during 1940-1949.^ No increased risk appeared with passive smoking. Husband's employment in a construction industry or a structural occupation significantly increased the smoking-adjusted odds ratios among cases and compeers (O.R. = 2.9, 2.2). Smoking-adjusted odds ratios increased significantly when women had resided with persons employed in cement (O.R. = 3.2) or insulation (O.R. = 5.5) manufacturing, or a high rise construction industry (O.R. = 2.4). A family history of lung cancer resulted in a two-fold increase in smoking-adjusted odds ratios. Vital status of compeers affected the odds ratios.^ Work-related exposures appear to increase the risk of lung cancer in women although cigarette smoking has the single highest odds ratio. Indirect exposure to certain employment also plays a significant role in lung cancer in women. Investigations of specific direct and indirect hazardous exposures in the workplace and home are needed. Cigarette smoking is as hazardous for women as for men. Smoking should be prevented and eliminated. ^

The success of worksite nutrition and physical activity interventions with environmental modifications A systematic review

Background: As obesity increases among U.S. workers, employers are implementing programs to increase physical activity and improve diets. Although programs to address individual determinants of obesity have been evaluated, less is known about the effects of workplace programs that change environmental factors, because most reviews have not isolated environmental programs; the one that did was published in 2005. ^ Objective: To update the 2005 review to determine the effectiveness of workplace environmental interventions. ^ Methods: The Medline database was searched for published English language reports (2003-2011) of randomized controlled (RCTs) or quasi-experimental trials (NRCTs) that evaluated strategies to modify physical activity opportunities or food services, targeting employees at least 18 years, not including retirees and that provided data for at least one physical activity, dietary, or health risk indicator. Three coders independently extracted study characteristics and scored the quality of study methods. Program effectiveness was determined using the 2005 review's best evidence approach. ^ Results: Seven studies represented in nine reports met eligibility criteria; three focused on diet and the remainder targeted diet and physical activity interventions. All but one study received a high quality score for internal validity. The evidence for the effectiveness of workplace environmental interventions was at best, inconclusive for diet and physical activity and limited for health risk indicators. The outcome constructs were inconsistent across the studies. ^ Conclusions: Limitations in the methods of the 2005 review made it challenging to draw conclusions about findings for this review that include: variation in outcome measures, reliance on distal measures without proximal behavior change measures, no distinction between changes at the workplace versus outside the workplace, and inappropriate analyses of cluster designs that biased findings toward statistical significance. The best evidence approach relied on vote-counting, using statistical significance alone rather than effect size and confidence intervals. Future research should address these limitations and use more rigorous methods; systematic reviews should use methods of meta-analysis to summarize study findings. These recommendations will help employers to better understand how environmental modifications in the workplace can support their efforts to combat the effects of obesity among employees.^