» Articles » PMID: 29941839

Toxic Effects of Methanol Among Illegally Dispatched Workers at Aluminum CNC Cutting Process in Small-Scale, Third-Tier Subcontractor Factories of Smartphone Manufacturers in the Republic of Korea

Overview
Publisher MDPI
Date 2018 Jun 27
PMID 29941839
Citations 1
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

An outbreak of occupational methanol poisoning occurred in small-scale, third-tier factories of large-scale smartphone manufacturers in the Republic of Korea in 2016. To investigate the working environment and the health effects of methanol exposure among co-workers in the methanol poisoning cases, we performed a cross-sectional study on 155 workers at five aluminum Computerized Numerical Control (CNC) cutting factories. Gas chromatography measured air and urinary methanol concentration. In the medical examination, symptom surveys, ophthalmological examinations, and neurobehavioral tests were done. Multiple logistic regression analyses controlling for age and sex were conducted to reveal the association of employment duration with symptoms. Air concentrations of methanol in factory A and E ranged from 228.5 to 2220.0 ppm. Mean urinary methanol concentrations of the workers in each factory were from 3.5 mg/L up to 91.2 mg/L. The odds ratios for symptoms of deteriorating vision and central nervous system (CNS) increased according to the employment duration after adjusting for age and sex. Four cases with an injured optic nerve and two cases with decreased neurobehavioral function were founded among co-workers of the victims. This study showed that the methanol exposure under poor environmental control not only produces eye and CNS symptoms but also affects neurobehavioral function and the optic nerve. The role of subcontracting production and dispatched work under poor environmental control was discussed.

Citing Articles

Biochemical mechanism underlying the pathogenesis of diabetic retinopathy and other diabetic complications in humans: the methanol-formaldehyde-formic acid hypothesis.

Zhu B Acta Biochim Biophys Sin (Shanghai). 2022; 54(4):415-451.

PMID: 35607958 PMC: 9828688. DOI: 10.3724/abbs.2022012.

References
1.
Givens M, Kalbfleisch K, Bryson S . Comparison of methanol exposure routes reported to Texas poison control centers. West J Emerg Med. 2009; 9(3):150-3. PMC: 2672266. View

2.
Aminian O, Hashemi S, Sadeghniiat-Haghighi K, Shariatzadeh A, Naseri Esfahani A . Psychomotor effects of mixed organic solvents on rubber workers. Int J Occup Environ Med. 2014; 5(2):78-83. PMC: 7767612. View

3.
Downie A, KHATTAB T, Malik M, Samara I . A case of percutaneous industrial methanol toxicity. Occup Med (Lond). 1992; 42(1):47-9. DOI: 10.1093/occmed/42.1.47. View

4.
Bebarta V, Heard K, Dart R . Inhalational abuse of methanol products: elevated methanol and formate levels without vision loss. Am J Emerg Med. 2006; 24(6):725-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2006.03.004. View

5.
Choi J, Lee S, Gil Y, Ryu J, Jung-Choi K, Kim H . Neurological Complications Resulting from Non-Oral Occupational Methanol Poisoning. J Korean Med Sci. 2017; 32(2):371-376. PMC: 5220007. DOI: 10.3346/jkms.2017.32.2.371. View