The Experts below are selected from a list of 297 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Orcr - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

Oswer - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

Sarah Smit - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • A comparison of facemask and respirator filtration test methods
    Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene, 2016
    Co-Authors: Samy Rengasamy, Ronald Shaffer, Brandon Williams, Sarah Smit
    Abstract:

    NIOSH published a Federal Register Notice to explore the possibility of incorporating FDA required filtration tests for surgical masks (SMs) in the 42 CFR Part 84 respirator certification process. ...

  • A comparison of facemask and respirator filtration test methods
    2016
    Co-Authors: Samy Rengasamy, Ronald Shaffer, Brandon Williams, Sarah Smit
    Abstract:

    NIOSH published a Federal Register Notice to explore the possibility of incorporating FDA required filtration tests for surgical masks (SMs) in the 42 CFR Part 84 respirator certification process. There have been no published studies comparing the filtration efficiency test methods used for NIOSH certification of N95 filtering facepiece respirators (N95 FFRs) with those used by the FDA for clearance of SMs. To address this issue, filtration efficiencies of “N95 FFRs” including six N95 FFR models and three surgical N95 FFR models, and three SM models were measured using the NIOSH NaCl aerosol test method, and FDA required particulate filtration efficiency (PFE) and bacterial filtration efficiency (BFE) methods, and viral filtration efficiency (VFE) method. Five samples of each model were tested using each method. Both PFE and BFE tests were done using unneutralized particles as per FDA guidance document. PFE was measured using 0.1 µm size polystyrene latex particles and BFE with ∼3.0 µm size particles containing Staphylococcus aureus bacteria. VFE was obtained using ∼3.0 µm size particles containing phiX 174 as the challenge virus and Escherichia coli as the host. Results showed that the efficiencies measured by the NIOSH NaCl method for “N95 FFRs” were from 98.15–99.68% compared to 99.74–99.99% for PFE, 99.62–99.9% for BFE, and 99.8–99.9% for VFE methods. Efficiencies by the NIOSH NaCl method were significantly (p =

Joel L. Mattsson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Risk assessment under FQPA: case study with chlorpyrifos.
    Neurotoxicology, 2001
    Co-Authors: Cheryl B. Cleveland, George R. Oliver, Bill Chen, Joel L. Mattsson
    Abstract:

    Key science policies have had significant impact on the evolving implementation of the Food Quality and Protection Act (FQPA) (PL 104-170, 1996) by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The impact offour of these policies will be examined using the risk assessment for chlorpyrifos as a case study. These policies are selection of a regulatory endpoint, use of animal data without consideration of human data for setting the reference dose, a 10 FQPA safety factor and use of the 99.9 percentile of modeled consumer exposure in the acute dietary assessment. Each of these policy decisions had individual impact that was then compounded as cumulative impact on the revised risk assessment for chlorpyrifos conducted by the US EPA in 2000 [Federal Register Notice 65(159) (2000) 49982]. But embedded within each science policy, there are assumptions which may be too conservative and which together have resulted in a very large multiplicative reduction in the allowable exposure limits for chlorpyrifos in the US. These new exposure limits are quite different from other regulatory standards around the world. There is third party opposition to many of these policies and many believe the understanding of the relationship between exposure and what is known about human and animal responses to chlorpyrifos has been clouded. These changes in policy insert a new level of conservatism into the scientific statement of risk and create confusion that threatens to weaken the credibility of the regulatory process.

Samy Rengasamy - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • A comparison of facemask and respirator filtration test methods
    Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene, 2016
    Co-Authors: Samy Rengasamy, Ronald Shaffer, Brandon Williams, Sarah Smit
    Abstract:

    NIOSH published a Federal Register Notice to explore the possibility of incorporating FDA required filtration tests for surgical masks (SMs) in the 42 CFR Part 84 respirator certification process. ...

  • A comparison of facemask and respirator filtration test methods
    2016
    Co-Authors: Samy Rengasamy, Ronald Shaffer, Brandon Williams, Sarah Smit
    Abstract:

    NIOSH published a Federal Register Notice to explore the possibility of incorporating FDA required filtration tests for surgical masks (SMs) in the 42 CFR Part 84 respirator certification process. There have been no published studies comparing the filtration efficiency test methods used for NIOSH certification of N95 filtering facepiece respirators (N95 FFRs) with those used by the FDA for clearance of SMs. To address this issue, filtration efficiencies of “N95 FFRs” including six N95 FFR models and three surgical N95 FFR models, and three SM models were measured using the NIOSH NaCl aerosol test method, and FDA required particulate filtration efficiency (PFE) and bacterial filtration efficiency (BFE) methods, and viral filtration efficiency (VFE) method. Five samples of each model were tested using each method. Both PFE and BFE tests were done using unneutralized particles as per FDA guidance document. PFE was measured using 0.1 µm size polystyrene latex particles and BFE with ∼3.0 µm size particles containing Staphylococcus aureus bacteria. VFE was obtained using ∼3.0 µm size particles containing phiX 174 as the challenge virus and Escherichia coli as the host. Results showed that the efficiencies measured by the NIOSH NaCl method for “N95 FFRs” were from 98.15–99.68% compared to 99.74–99.99% for PFE, 99.62–99.9% for BFE, and 99.8–99.9% for VFE methods. Efficiencies by the NIOSH NaCl method were significantly (p =