Stewart-PA; Coble-JB; Vermeulen-R; Blair-A; Lubin-J; Attfield-M; Silverman-DT
Ann Occup Hyg 2011 Apr; 55(3):343-346
We thank the journal for the opportunity to respond to the submission by Borak et al. (2011) regarding our recent papers on the Diesel Exhaust in Miners Study (DEMS). The primary concern of Borak et al. (2011) related to the precision of the historical exposure estimates at the study mines, which they claimed are unduly susceptible to several sources of random variability. We agree that imprecision exists in our estimates, but we disagree with the conclusions Borak et al. (2011) drew on this issue. The study and historical monitoring data and descriptive information used for the development of historical quantitative exposure estimates of REC, along with the extensive description of the estimation process and the evaluation of the methods, are major strengths of the DEMS. We do not believe, nor do we claim, that our approach is without error. Rather, we believe that the procedure used was a sound assessment strategy to estimate historical exposure levels, as indicated by comparison to independent data, and is a significant improvement over earlier procedures and a contribution to the science of exposure assessment in general.
Chronic-exposure; Diesel-emissions; Epidemiology; Exposure-assessment; Exposure-methods; Inhalation-studies; Mathematical-models; Miners; Mine-workers; Mining-industry; Occupational-exposure; Pulmonary-system; Quantitative-analysis; Respiratory-hypersensitivity; Respiratory-irritants; Statistical-analysis; Work-environment; Worker-health; Workplace-studies; Underground-miners
Annals of Occupational Hygiene