Evaluation Effect of Inhalable Particulate Matter Exposure on Human Health in Center of Karbala City

Evaluation Effect of Inhalable Particulate Matter Exposure on Human Health in Center of Karbala City

Asst. Prof. Ala'a Hamed Emran Al-Husseini Babylon University-College of Engineering

Abstract:- Recently inhalable particulate matter PM2.5 and PM10 acquired great interest because of its reverse impact on human health and its pollution caused inevitable economic losses for society. This study tried to evaluate hourly and daily means of particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10) concentrations risk in the center of Karbala city in central of Iraq, from 1 June to 20 July 2015. These concentrations crossed WHO permissible limits at ratios of 16% and 12% for PM2.5 and PM10 respectively. According to health risk assessment, this place outed of hazard risk represented by hazard quotient HQ < 1 for all days also safe for carcinogenic impact; all days had cancer risk CR < 10-6. This study approved that the proportions of attributable fractions AF and excessing risk ER (long- term exposure to PM2.5) for lung cancer mortality and cardiopulmonary mortality might decreasing at about 19%, 27%, 23% and 36% respectively at 95% confidence interval if the concentrations of PM2.5 kept at 3g/m3. Finally, air quality index categorized the ambient air of this place at rating B (good).

Keywords: Air pollution, inhalable, attributable fractions, excess risk, air quality index

1. INTRODUCTION

   Air pollutants categorized as gaseous or particulate matter (Bree et al., 2000). Pollutants classified also according to the type of formation into primary and secondary pollutants. Primary pollutants released into the atmosphere directly from multiple sources, such as wood burning or vehicle exhaust (Gozzi et al., 2017). Secondary pollutants already presented in the atmosphere and formed from the reactions of pollutants with each other in the presence of sunlight (Barn et al., 2011). Air pollution poses a clear threat to public health, and the huge increasing in population, vehicles, industrial activities and rapid economic growth had caused a noticeable increase in air pollutants' concentrations. The World Health Organization WHO confirmed in its report published in 2013 that the number of deaths reached 2 million cases due to ambient air pollution, according to epidemiological studies. Exposure to polluted air causes either short-term (acute, up to 24 hours) and long-term (chronic, months or years) effects on humans (Morakinyo et al., 2018).

   Among all air pollutants, many toxicological studies had shown that particulate matter were the most effective pollutants entering the human body. Particulate matter had a wide range of sizes it was not a single pollutant also it was different in shape and chemical composition containing organic, inorganic, metallic and silicate compounds. It caused many diseases of the respiratory system, lungs and heart. Continuous exposure to particulate matter leads to death. PM10 (particles of diameter10m)

   (Filonchyk et al., 2016), deposited on the surface of the larger airways of the upper region of the lung, PM2.5 (particles of diameter

   2.5m), deposited on the deeper surface of the lung depending on particle size (Jeffrey et al., 1997).

   There is a positive relation between exposure to daily mean concentrations of PM10 and the incidence of respiratory symptoms, when PM10 > 60g/m3 in cases of chronic respiratory or cardiovascular diseases (Villamizar et al., 2012).

   Because of the increased risks of pollution on human health, especially in urban areas, health risk assessment needed to

   estimate the relationship between the duration of exposure to these pollutants and their reverse health effects. These pollutants can directly effect on human health in hot weather because increasing in temperature degree causes extra stress on human body as recorded in physiology studies (Xu et al., 2014). This paper adopted health risk assessment related with exposure to inhalable particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10) in summer in center of Karbala city resulting from the increasing of pilgrims from inside and outside of Iraq to visit the holy shrines there. Attributable fraction and excess risk also estimated to decrease the proportion of mortality by avoided the excessive exposure to inhalable particulate matter.

2. METHODOLOGY AND MATERIALS

   1. Study Area and Population

      Karbala city located in middle of Iraq, at about 97 km southwest of Baghdad, and a few miles east of Razzaza Lake. Karbala had an estimated population of 1,378,0000 people in 2013. This city considered a holy city for Muslims because of the location of shrines of Imam Hussein ibn Ali and Abbas ibn Ali (peace be upon them). Twice a year millions of Muslims visited this site, in the tenth day of the Muharram month, (Hussein's martyrdom) and the main event is the 40th day. Most of the pilgrims travelled on foot from all around Iraq and other countries. Karbala had a desert hot climate (hot, long, dry summer and mild winter). Between November and April all of the yearly precipitation occurred, anyway no any wet month (https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/). Fig.1 showed study site. Hourly particulate matter PM2.5 and PM10 concentrations in center of

      Karbala city collected from Karbala Environment Department. These concentrations were done using Aeroqual M60 New Zealand origin.

      Karbala

      Study Area

      Fig.1: Description of Study Site.

   2. Exposure and Risk Analysis

      Exposure to particulate matter PM2.5 and PM10 caused carcinogens and non- carcinogens diseases. The effects of exposure evaluated by following the standard methods used in many previous studies:

      C IR ET ED EF

      ID =

      1

      AT BW

      ID inhalation dose (µg/kg/day), C particulate matter concentration (µg/m3), IR rate of inhalation (m3.day-1) (14.25 m3.day-1 took averaging rate of inhalation for adult male and female), ET exposure time (hr/day) (24hr/day), ED exposure duration (year) (70 year), EF exposure frequency (day/year) ( 365 day/year), AT average time(day) (8760 day for non- carcinogens impact and 25550 day for cancer risk) and BW average body weight (kg) (62.8 kg) , ( Habeebullah et al., 2015).

      1. Hazard Index

         Non- carcinogens effect from exposure to particulate matter estimated as:

         ID

         HQ = 2

         RfD

         HQ hazard index (no unit), RfD is the reference of inhalation dose (mg/kg/day) (for PM10 1.1*10-2 mg/kg/day). (Kosowska, 2018). Reverse effect on human health occurred when HQ > 1. (de Oliveira et al., 2012).

      2. Cancer Risk

         Below formula used to estimate carcinogens effect from exposure to particulate matter:

         CR = ID SF 3

         RU

         SF =

         4

         IR BW

         CR cancer risk (no unit), SF slope factor for inhalation (mg/kg/day)-1 and RU risk unit (0.008 µg/m3 for PM2.5 as EPA assumption) (Odekanle, 2020). EPA reported that range: (10-4 < CR < 10-6) was acceptable, this mean if CR less than 10-6 no cancer risk and when CR greater than 10-4 cancer risk was exist (Al-Husseini, 2017).

      3. Relative Risk

         In relative risk analysis, environmental burden disease method was adopted with attributable fractions AF that evaluated deaths proportion which increasing from diseases such as lung cancer, cardiopulmonary and mortality. When particulate matter concentrations eliminated to 10 g/m3 for (PM10) and 3 g/m3 for (PM2.5), attributable fractions proportion decreased (Odekanle, 2020). Relative risk RR also estimated the probability of (all-cause mortality) or (lung cancer and cardiopulmonary mortality) in human exposed to more than 1 g/m3 of PM10 . Relative risk calculations divided into two categories:

         1. all-cause mortality for all ages:

            RR = exp·[(X X0)] 5

            X means of PM10 concentrations g/m3, X0 baseline concentration for PM10 (10g/m3) and risk function coefficient (0.0008; for 95% confidence interval, CI: 0.00060.0010) (Chalvatzaki et al., 2019).

         2. lung cancer and cardiopulmonary mortality for age > 30year

   (X + 1)

   0

   0

   RR = [(X + 1)] 6

   X means of PM2.5 concentrations g/m3, X0 baseline of concentration, for PM2.5 (3g/m3) and risk function coefficient (0.23218;for 95% confidence interval, CI: 0.085630.37873) for lung cancer mortality and (0.15515 ; for 95% confidence interval, CI: 0.05620.2541) for cardiopulmonary mortality.

   Then found attributable fractions AF as following:

   (RR 1)

   AF = 7

   RR

   Attributable fractions evaluated the proportion of deaths from diseases, which can be avoided if particulate matter levels reduced to 10g/m3 for (PM10) and 3g/m3 for (PM2.5) (Chalvatzaki et al., 2019). Excess risk for inhalable particulate matter can be estimated as follows:

   ER = RR 1 8

3. ANALYTICAL RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

   3.1 Ambient Air Standards and Air Quality Index

   Table .1 showed the statistical indices of the particulate matter (PM2.5) and (PM10) in addition to WHO standards for mean daily data. Figs.2 and 3 explained the hourly and daily means concentrations of particulate matter PM2.5 and PM10 receptivity 16% of daily means PM2.5 concentrations and 12% of daily means PM10 concentrations are out of WHO standards.

   Table 1. Statistical Indices of the Particulate Matter and WHO Standards (WHO Air quality guidelines, 2005).

   Pollutant	Statistical Indices(g/m3)		WHO Standards(g/m3) Daily Means (24-hour)
   PM2.5	Max.	53.825	25
   	Min.	4.78625
   	SD.	15.62341
   PM10	Max.	84.22875	50
   	Min.	7.900417
   	SD.	23.75863

   (a)

   (a)

   180

   160

   140

   PM2.5(µg/m3)

   PM2.5(µg/m3)

   120

   100

   80

   60

   40

   20

   0

   0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

   Time(hour)

   (b)

   (b)

   350

   300

   3

   3

   PM10(µg/m )

   PM10(µg/m )

   250

   200

   150

   100

   50

   0

   0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

   Time(hour)

   Fig.2 (a and b): Hourly Particulate Matter (PM2.5 and PM10) Concentrations from 1 June to 20 July.

   (a)

   (a)

   60

   50

   PM2.5(µg/m )

   PM2.5(µg/m )

   3

   3

   40

   30

   20

   10

   0

   1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49

   Time(day)

   (b)

   (b)

   100

   80

   PM10(µg/m3)

   PM10(µg/m3)

   60

   40

   20

   0

   1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49

   Time(day)

   Fig.3 (a and b): Daily Means Particulate Matter (PM2.5 and PM10) Concentrations from 1 June to 20 July.

   Air quality index AQI gave another indication of inhaled particulate matter PM10 impact on ambient air quality as recorded in Table 2. Mean daily concentrations of PM10 is (23.044 g/m3) categorized in rating B (good), no information available about PM2.5 ratings.

   Table 2.Air Quality Index of Inhaled Particulate Matter PM10.

   Rating	PM10(g/m3)	Category
   A (0 15)	0 15	Very good
   B (16 31)	16 75	Good
   C (32 49)	76 100	Moderate
   D (50 99)	101 150	Poor
   E (> 100)	>150	Very poor

   3.2 Health Risk Indices

   Health risk analysis associated with carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic indices ,which described reverse effect of inhalable particulate matter on human health. First, the chronic daily intake ID was calculated for PM2.5 and PM10, and the hazard quotient HQ values were determined for PM10 only, no determined value of RfD for PM2.5. From Fig.4 it is clear that all the calculated values are less than 1 and this means no hazard risk.

   4.50E-04

   4.00E-04

   3.50E-04

   3.00E-04

   HQ

   HQ

   2.50E-04

   2.00E-04

   1.50E-04

   1.00E-04

   5.00E-05

   0.00E+00

   1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49

   Time(day)

   Fig.4: Hazard Quotient for Inhalable Particulate Matter PM10.

   For carcinogenic effect, carcinogenic risk index CR associated with PM2.5 concentrations are evaluated according to the equations submitted in methodology. Fig.5 showed that all determined values of CR are higher than 10-6 so no health threat with carcinogenic diseases by inhalation of PM2.5.

   3.50E-07

   3.00E-07

   2.50E-07

   CR

   CR

   2.00E-07

   1.50E-07

   1.00E-07

   5.00E-08

   1. E+00

      1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49

      Time(day)

      Fig.5: Cancer Risk for Inhalable Particulate Matter PM2.5.

      The summery for calculated attributable fractions AF and excess risk ER placed in Table 3. Generally, the proportions of attributable fractions AF and excessing risk ER for lung cancer mortality and cardiopulmonary mortality for long-term exposed to PM2.5 might decreasing at about 19%, 27%, 23% and 36% respectively at 95% confidence interval if the concentrations of PM2.5 kept at 3g/m3. For PM10 no noticeable effect exited.

      Table 3: Proportions of Attributable Fractions and Excess Risk for PM2.5 and PM10.

      Pollutant	AF%	ER %
      PM10 All-Cause Mortality (For confidence interval (95%) CI: 0.00060.0010).	0.01	0.01
      PM2.5 Cardiopulmonary Mortality (For confidence interval (95%) CI: 0.05620.2541)	0.19	0.23
      PM2.5 Lung Cancer Mortality (For confidence interval (95%) CI: 0.085630.37873)	0.27	0.36

4. CONCLUSIONS

This paper was concerning with the airborne concentration of (PM2.5 and PM10) in center of Karbala city to assess (health risk) related with exposure to these particles. Health assessment used to evaluate this impact on human health. Results showed that this place had rating B (good) according to air quality index AQI. Hazard quotient was less than one in all days and the place is safe for carcinogenic impact. Generally, the proportions of attributable fractions AF and excessing risk ER for lung cancer mortality and cardiopulmonary mortality for long-term exposed to PM2.5 might decreasing at about 19%, 27%, 23% and 36% respectively at 95% confidence interval if the concentrations of PM2.5 kept at 3g/m3. For PM10 no noticeable effect exited.

REFERENCES

1. Al-Hsseini, A.H.E. (2017). " Risk Assessment Of Heavy Metals In Tap Drinking Water In Different Age Group; In Baghdad City, Iraq". Mesopotamia Environmental journal. Vol: Four, No: Two, pp (89-102).ISSN2410-2598. www.bumej.com.

2. Barn, P., Jackson, P., Suzuki, N., Kosatsky, T., Jennejohn, D., Henderson, S., McCormick, W., Millar, G., Plain, E., Poplawski, K. and Setton, E. (2011). "Air Quality Assessment Tools: A Guide for Public Health Practitioners ". National Collaborating Centre for Environmental Health.

3. Bree, L.V. and Cassee, F.R. (2000)." Toxicity of Ambient Air PM10".Resaerch for Man and Environment. RIVM Report No. 650010015.National Institute of Public Health and the Envioronment, P.O.3720 BA Bilthoven the Netherlands.

4. Chalvatzaki, E., Chatoutsidou, S.E., Lehtomäki, H., Almeida, S.M., Eleftheriadis, K., Hänninen, O. and Lazaridis, M. (2019). "Characterization of Human Health Risks from Particulate Air Pollution in Selected European Cities". http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/atmos10020096.

5. de Oliveira, B.F.A., Ignotti, E., Artaxo, P., Hilário do Nascimento, P.H., Junger, W.L. and Hacon, S. (2012). "Risk Assessment of PM2.5 to Child Residents in Brazilian Amazon Region with Biofuel Production". Environmental Health, 11:64. http://www.ehjournal.net/content/.

6. Filonchyk, M., Yan, H., Yang, SH.and Hurynovich, V. (2016). "A Study of PM2.5 and PM10 Concentrations in the Atmosphere of Large Cities in Gansu Province, China, In Summer Period". Earth Syst. Sci., DOI 10.1007/s12040-016-0722-x, 125, No. 6, pp. 11751187.c_Indian Academy of Sciences.

7. Gozzi, F., Ventura, G. D., Marcelli, A. and Lucci, F. (2017)." Current Status of Particulate Matter Pollution in Europe and Future Perspectives: a Review". Journal of Materials and Environmental Sciences, ISSN: 2028-2508. JMES, Volume 8, Issue 6, Page 1901-1909. http://www.jmaterenvironsci.com/.

8. Habeebullah, T.M., Mohammed, A.M. F. and Morsy,E.A.( 2015). "Risk Assessment of Particulate Matter (PM10) in Makkah, Saudi Arabia". World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology. International Journal of Environmental and Ecological Engineering. Vol: Nine, No: 8. http://scholar.waset.org/1307-6892/10001998.

9. https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/.

10. Jeffrey R. B., Tom F. D. and Richard T. B. (1997)." The Relationship among TSP, PM10, PM2.5, and Inorganic Constituents of Atmospheric Participate Matter at Multiple Canadian Locations". Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association. ISSN: 1096-2247. https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uawm20.

11. Kosowska, A.G. (2018). "Assessment of the Krako´w inhabitants health risk caused by the exposure to inhalation of outdoor air contaminants". Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 32:485499. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-016-1366-8.

12. Morakinyo, O.M., Adebowale, A.S., Mokgobu, M.I. and Mukhola, M.S. (2018). "Health Risk of Inhalation Exposure to Sub-10 m Particulate Matter and Gaseous Pollutants in an Urban-Industrial Area in South Africa: An Ecological Study". BMJ Open 2017; 7:e013941. http://bmjopen.bmj.com/.

13. Odekanle, E.L., Sonibare, O.O., Odejobi, O.J., Fakinle, B.S. and Funso Alaba Akeredolu, F.A. (2020). "Air Emissions and Health Risk Assessment around Abattoir Facility". Heliyon. http://www.cell.com/heliyon.

14. Rodriguez-Villamizar, L.A., Castro-Ortiz, H. and Rey-Serrano, J.J. (2012). "The Effects of Air Pollution on Respiratory Health in Susceptible Populations: A Multilevel Study in Bucaramanga, Colombia". Artigo Article. 28(4):749-757.

15. WHO Air quality guidelines for particulate matter, ozone, nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide. Global update (2005). Summary of risk assessment. WHO/SDE/PHE/OEH/06.02.

16. Xu, L., Yin, H. and Xie, X. (2014). "Health Risk Assessment of Inhalable Particulate Matter in Beijing Based on the Thermal Environment". Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 11, 12368-12388; doi: 10.3390/ijerpp11212368.