Dibutyl ether

Exposure related observations in humans: other data

Administrative data

Endpoint:

exposure-related observations in humans: other data

Type of information:

experimental study

Adequacy of study:

supporting study

Study period:

1943

Reliability:

2 (reliable with restrictions)

Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:

other: Short report only, no details available

Cross-reference

Cross-reference 1

Reason / purpose for cross-reference:

reference to same study

Cross-reference 2

Reason / purpose for cross-reference:

reference to other study

Data source

Reference

Reference 1

Reference Type:

publication

Title:

Sensory response to certain industrial solvent vapors

Author:

Nelson, K.W., Ege, J.F. Jr., Ross, M., Woodman, L.E., Silverman, L.

Year:

1943

Bibliographic source:

J. Ind. Hyg. Toxicol. 28 (7) 282-285

Reference 2

Reference Type:

publication

Title:

Further studies on sensory response to certain industrial solvent vapors

Author:

Silverman, L., Schulte, H.F., First, M.W.

Year:

1946

Bibliographic source:

J. Ind. Hyg. Toxicol., 28, 262-266

Materials and methods

Type of study / information:

Type of experience: other: Sensory irritant properties on humans

Endpoint addressed:

not applicable

Test guideline

Qualifier:

no guideline available

Principles of method if other than guideline:

The objective of this experiment was to evaluate the unplesant effects of solvent vapours on huma subjects

GLP compliance:

no

Test material

Test material information

Constituent 1

Reference substance name:

Dibutyl ether

EC Number:

205-575-3

EC Name:

Dibutyl ether

Cas Number:

142-96-1

Molecular formula:

C8H18O

IUPAC Name:

1-butoxybutane

Details on test material:

no information available

Method

Ethical approval:

no

Details on study design:

In a 1200 cubic foot gas cabinet an average number of 12 persons, of mixed sexes, was exposed to a given concentration of solvent vapor for a period of 15 minutes. After the exposure, each individual classified the effect of the vapor on the eyes, nose, and throat. The classifications possible were: no reaction, slight irritating, and very irritating. The odor was listed as absent, definite, moderate, strong, or overpowering. Finally each person was asked if he believed he could work in the atmosphere for an eight-hour day. The subjects, except the experimenters, were kept in ignorance of the actual concentrations and whether or not the exposures to any one solvent were in order of increasing or decreasing concentrations. The amount of vapor which the majority of subjects rejected as a working atmosphere was termed objectionable

Exposure assessment:

not specified

Details on exposure:

In a 1200 cubic foot gas cabinet an average number of 12 persons, of mixed sexes, was exposed to a given concentration of solvent vapor for a period of 15 minutes. After the exposure, each individual classified the effect of the vapor on the eyes, nose, and throat. The classifications possible were: no reaction, slight irritating, and very irritating. The odor was listed as absent, definite, moderate, strong, or overpowering. Finally each person was asked if he believed he could work in the atmosphere for an eight-hour day. The subjects, except the experimenters, were kept in ignorance of the actual concentrations and whether or not the exposures to any one solvent were in order of increasing or decreasing concentrations. The amount of vapor which the majority of subjects rejected as a working atmosphere was termed objectionable

Results and discussion

Results:

Under the conditions of the study, 200 ppm (app. 1066 mg/m³) were sensory irritating to the eyes and the nose but not to the throat of a majority of subjects. At 300 ppm (app. 1599 mg/m³) the odor was not objectionable to the majority of subjects.

Any other information on results incl. tables

None

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Conclusions:

Under the conditions of the study, 200 ppm (app. 1066 mg/m³) were sensory irritating to the eyes and the nose but not to the throat of a majority of subjects. At 300 ppm (app. 1599 mg/m³) the odor was not objectionable to the majority of subjects.

Executive summary:

The objective of the experiment was to evaluate on humans the unpleasant, not necessarily toxic, effects of solvent vapors. In a 1200 cubic foot gas cabinet an average number of 12 persons, of mixed sexes, was exposed to a given concentration of solvent vapor for a period of 15 minutes. After the exposure, each individual classified the effect of the vapor on the eyes, nose, and throat. The classifications possible were: no reaction, slight irritating, and very irritating. The odor was listed as absent, definite, moderate, strong, or overpowering. Finally each person was asked if he believed he could work in the atmosphere for an eight-hour day. The subjects, except the experimenters, were kept in ignorance of the actual concentrations and whether or not the exposures to any one solvent were in order of increasing or decreasing concentrations. The amount of vapor which the majority of subjects rejected as a working atmosphere was termed objectionable

Under the conditions of the study, 200 ppm (app. 1066 mg/m³) were sensory irritating to the eyes and the nose but not to the throat of a majority of subjects. At 300 ppm (app. 1599 mg/m³) the odor was not objectionable to the majority of subjects.