Abstract

Multi-year follow-up of 358 workers of aluminum pot rooms, including 165 individuals suffering from fluorosis, has shown significant changes in the clinical picture of the chronic occupational fluorine intoxication, developed under modern conditions of production, at lower concentrations of fluorine compounds in the air of working area. In this connection, the pathology of the musculoskeletal system plays the dominating role in this clinical picture and has the large variability of combinations of the individual sections destructions of the bone tissue. The main criterion to establish the phase of the disease is still the number and severity of the signs of this destruction. The visceral pathology in contemporary production circumstances is registered with less frequency and loses a number of the previously described clinical manifestations, however, is still of some importance to identify the early signs of the disease and to prevent the fluorosis on time.

• Related Studies :

  • Alert on long-term lumbago and skelalgia not responsive to anti-rheumatic pharmacotherapy

    In our work we have often dealt with patients who were diagnosed with “rheumatic or rheumatoid arthritis” in rural basic medical units or certain hospitals. A minority of those patients did have rheumatoid arthritis, but most of them did not improve with anti-rheumatic pharmacotherapy for multiple years; instead, their conditions

  • [Epidemiology and clinical study of endemic fluorosis in a village that has improved water for 40 years].

    Objective: To investigate the control effect of water improvement for endemic fluorosis over a long period of time, the health status of the residents in the disease area and the restoration to health of endemic fluorosis patients. Methods: It was investigated that the water improvement lasting for 40 years and the rate

  • Radiological modifications of the skeletal system among aluminum smelter workers: A 15 year retrospective study

    Previously by the time skeletal fluorosis among aluminum smelter workers due to high fluoride exposure was diagnosed numerous cases of bone fluorosis had already reached stages II and III according to Roholm. Today, as a result of improved working conditions and continuous health care, the picture has changed. This paper

  • Plasma fluoride level as a predictor of voriconazole induced periostitis in patients with skeletal pain

    BACKGROUND: Voriconazole is a triazole antifungal medication used for prophylaxis or to treat invasive fungal infections. Inflammation of the periosteum resulting in skeletal pain, known as periostitis, is a reported side effect of long-term voriconazole therapy. The tri-fluorinated molecular structure of voriconazole suggests a possible link between excess fluoride and

  • [Etiology and treatment of postoperative spinal cord injury for patients undergoing laminectomy for fluorosis thoracic canal stenosis].

    OBJECTIVE: To elucidate the etiology of postoperative spinal cord injury (PSCI) for patients undergoing laminectomy for fluorosis thoracic canal stenosis (FTCS) and summarize the methods of diagnosis and treatment. METHODS: From 2006 to 2009, a total of 192 FTCS cases underwent laminectomy. Among them, 16 cases with gradual postoperative neural deterioration were finally

• Related FAN Content :

  • Skeletal Fluorosis: The Misdiagnosis Problem

    It is a virtual certainty that there are individuals in the general population unknowingly suffering from some form of skeletal fluorosis as a result of a doctor's failure to consider fluoride as a cause of their symptoms. Proof that this is the case can be found in the following case reports of skeletal fluorosis written by doctors in the U.S. and other western countries. As can be seen, a consistent feature of these reports is that fluorosis patients--even those with crippling skeletal fluorosis--are misdiagnosed for years by multiple teams of doctors who routinely fail to consider fluoride as a possible cause of their disease.

  • "Pre-Skeletal" Fluorosis

    As demonstrated by the studies below, skeletal fluorosis may produce adverse symptoms, including arthritic pains, clinical osteoarthritis, gastrointestinal disturbances, and bone fragility, before the classic bone change of fluorosis (i.e., osteosclerosis in the spine and pelvis) is detectable by x-ray. Relying on x-rays, therefore, to diagnosis skeletal fluorosis will invariably fail to protect those individuals who are suffering from the pre-skeletal phase of the disease. Moreover, some individuals with clinical skeletal fluorosis will not develop an increase in bone density, let alone osteosclerosis, of the spine. Thus, relying on unusual increases in spinal bone density will under-detect the rate of skeletal fluoride poisoning in a population.

  • Fluoride & Osteoarthritis

    While the osteoarthritic effects that occurred from fluoride exposure were once considered to be limited to those with skeletal fluorosis, recent research shows that fluoride can cause osteoarthritis in the absence of traditionally defined fluorosis. Conventional methods used for detecting skeletal fluorosis, therefore, will fail to detect the full range of people suffering from fluoride-induced osteoarthritis.

  • Fluoride & Rheumatoid Arthritis

    The symptoms of skeletal fluorosis can closely resemble rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and thus individuals with fluorosis can "easily be mistaken" as having RA. In addition, clinical research on fluoride-treated osteoporosis patients has found that fluoride exposure can exacerbate pre-existing RA, and recent research shows that the levels of fluoride found in the blood of the general population (19-57 ppb) are sufficient to effect an enzyme (15-lipoxygenase) implicated in the inflammatory process of RA.

  • Skeletal Fluorosis & Individual Variability

    One of the common fallacies in the research on skeletal fluorosis is the notion that there is a uniform level of fluoride that is safe for everyone in the population. These "safety thresholds" have been expressed in terms of (a) bone fluoride content, (b) daily dose, (c) water fluoride level, (d) urinary fluoride level, and (e) blood fluoride level. The central fallacy with each of these alleged safety thresholds, however, is that they ignore the wide range of individual susceptibility in how people respond to toxic substances, including fluoride.