This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow View responses
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Moya, J.
Right arrow Articles by Etzel, R. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Moya, J.
Right arrow Articles by Etzel, R. A.
Related Collections
Right arrow Therapeutics & Toxicology
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?
PEDIATRICS Vol. 113 No. 4 April 2004, pp. 996-1006

SUPPLEMENT ARTICLE

Children’s Behavior and Physiology and How It Affects Exposure to Environmental Contaminants

Jacqueline Moya, BS*, Cynthia F. Bearer, MD, PhD{ddagger} and Ruth A. Etzel, MD, PhD§

* US Environmental Protection Agency, National Center for Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC
{ddagger} Department of Pediatrics and Neurosciences, Case Western Reserve University, School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio
§ George Washington University, School of Public Health and Health Services, Washington, DC


   ABSTRACT
TOP
 ABSTRACT
BEHAVIORS AND PHYSIOLOGIC NEEDS...
 EXPOSURE DATA RELEVANT TO...
 DATA GAPS AND CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 
Infant, child, and adolescent exposures to environmental toxicants are different from those of adults because of differences in behavior and physiology. Because of these differences, there is the potential for quantitatively different exposures at various stages of development. Pediatricians are well aware of these behavioral and physiologic differences from a clinical standpoint—namely, food and water intake, soil ingestion, mouthing behavior, inhalation physiology, and activity level—as they relate to the ratio of these parameters between the adult and the child when considering weight and surface area. Pediatricians recognized the importance of pica as a cause of lead poisoning, the noxious effect of second-hand smoke, and the greater propensity for addiction during the adolescent years. For determining the differences in impact of many environmental toxicants between adults and children, research is needed to document where and whether these differences result in deleterious effects.

Key Words: children • behaviors • exposure • food intake • water intake • soil intake • inhalation rates • soil adherence

Abbreviations: EPA, Environmental Protection Agency • USDA, US Department of Agriculture • CSFII, Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals

It is a child’s job to explore his environment. The exploratory behaviors of childhood are the principal ways that children learn. The normal behavioral development of a child will also influence his or her environmental exposures. Children are naturally curious and active. Infants learn about objects by mouthing them (hand-to-mouth behaviors). Toddlers learn by venturing out of doors and testing their physical prowess. As children become adolescents, they gain more and more freedom from parental authority. They learn by trying new things (eg, smoking). Although they are at a stage of development at which physical strength and stamina are at a peak, they are continuing to acquire abstract thinking.1 Therefore, they may not consider cause and effect, particularly delayed effects, in the same way as adults do. They may place themselves in situations with greater risk as a result of this lack of perception. Although there are tremendous benefits to the exploratory learning that occurs during childhood, it obviously has its risks.

Many factors influence children’s health. These factors include genetic background, physiology, nutrition, age, lifestyle, and so forth. Parental exposures that occur before conception can also threaten the health of the fetus either because the maternal or paternal reproductive organs are affected or because chemicals can be stored in the body and excreted during pregnancy. The purpose of this article, however, is to describe the normal childhood behaviors at various life stages and illustrate the ways in which these behaviors and physiologies put them at risk of exposure to environmental contaminants.


   BEHAVIORS AND PHYSIOLOGIC NEEDS AT VARIOUS LIFE STAGES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 BEHAVIORS AND PHYSIOLOGIC NEEDS...
EXPOSURE DATA RELEVANT TO...
 DATA GAPS AND CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 
Exposure to an environmental agent is the first step in the sequence of environmentally related health effects. Exposures differ with developmental stage because the environments of fetuses, children, and adolescents are different from those of adults. On a body weight basis, children breathe more air, drink more water, and consume more of certain foods than adults. Children develop in spurts and, at times, discontinuously. For this reason, children’s behavioral stages are better defined as a continuum rather than fixed age categories. There is no consistent way to define these age categories. Sometimes the categories selected are driven by the amount of data available. Experts at an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-sponsored workshop suggested a set of age categories that may be used while more specific data are developed.2 Table 1 summarizes the proposed age categories and the behavioral characteristics associated with the different routes of exposure that were proposed.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 1. Behaviors at Various Stages of Childhood

 
This article presents data on breast milk intake, water intake, food consumption, soil intake rates, mouthing behavior, inhalation rates, soil adherence factors, and time spent in various activities. Much of the data presented was extracted from the EPA Interim Final Child-Specific Exposure Factors Handbook.3 A literature search was conducted to identify other relevant data.


   EXPOSURE DATA RELEVANT TO CHILDREN’S BEHAVIOR AND PHYSIOLOGY
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 BEHAVIORS AND PHYSIOLOGIC NEEDS...
 EXPOSURE DATA RELEVANT TO...
DATA GAPS AND CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 
Breast Milk Intake
The diets of many newborns are limited to breast milk. The American Academy of Pediatrics advocates breastfeeding as the optimal form of nutrition for infants.4 Epidemiologic research shows that breast milk and breastfeeding of infants provide advantages with regard to general health, growth, and development while significantly decreasing risk for a large number of acute and chronic diseases.4

Breast milk, however, can be a potential source of exposure to toxic chemicals for nursing infants. This is especially true because breastfed infants are at the top of the food chain.5 Certain chemicals can accumulate in the mother’s fatty tissue and may be transferred to an infant during breastfeeding. Studies of breast milk have shown the presence of chlorinated organic contaminants such as polychlorinated biphenyls and dioxins.6–8 Breast milk contains fat in which these chemicals tend to accumulate.6 Estimating exposure via this route requires information about the amount of breast milk intake. Average breast milk intake rates range from 427 mL/day to 765 mL/day for children <1 year of age.9–14 Upper percentile values range from 900 mL/day to 1059 mL/day. Information on the fat content of breast milk may also be necessary to assess exposure when chemical concentrations are indexed to lipid content. Lipid content in breast milk is approximately 4%.11–16 Although some mothers breastfeed beyond 12 months, data on the prevalence of this behavior or the amount consumed by the child are not currently available.

Food Intake
Toxic chemicals may enter the food supply as a result of environmental contamination. The consumption of a wide variety of foods minimizes the chance of eating large amounts of a particular food that may be contaminated. However, a child’s eating habits differ from those of an adult in the choices of food and amounts of a particular food item eaten. As another example, food neophobia, initial reluctance to eat new foods, is a normal behavior among young children. Children with neophobia had a higher intake of saturated fat and less food variety than children without food neophobia.17

Also, for many foods, the intake per unit body weight is greater for children than adults. The diet of children contains more milk products and more fruits and vegetables per unit body weight than adults. The primary source of food consumption data are the US Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) Nationwide Food Consumption Survey and the USDA Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII). Analysis of these data shows that, for example, the average consumption of apples for children between birth and 5 months of age is 19 g/kg/day (consumers only). Because the data were broken out by specific age groups and infants at birth are not likely to eat apples, the average apple consumption will probably be higher if one only looks at a finer age group (eg, 3 to 5 months of age). Adults older than 20 years consume approximately 2 g/kg/day of apples (consumers only). When the level of exposure of children to Alar was calculated using a child’s daily consumption of apples and apple products, an unacceptable level of risk for cancer was found.18 This section summarizes food intake data obtained from an EPA analysis of the most recent USDA CSFII (1994–1996). Although data from the 1998 CSFII survey are available, analysis of these data has not been conducted. Table 2 summarizes the per capita consumption of the major food groups. Data for adults older than 20 years are also included for comparison purposes. Definitions of the major food groups can be found in Appendix 1. Table 3 focuses on individual food items that at least 10% of the children in the survey reported having eaten. It is important to note that the CSFII survey is conducted over a period of 2 nonconsecutive days and is based on a 24-hour recall. Therefore, these estimates of intake may not reflect long-term consumption patterns.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 2. Per Capita Intake of the Major Food Groups (g/kg/day as Consumed)

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 3. Per Capita Intake of Individual Food (g/kg/day as Consumed)3

 
Tap Water Intake
Microbiologic and chemical contaminants can enter water supplies. Tap water may be a source of human exposure to these contaminants. The source of the pollution can be the result of human activity or naturally occurring chemicals. Contaminants may enter water sources by seeping through the soil to the ground water or entering streams as surface runoff. For instance, fertilizers and pesticides used in agricultural sites can migrate in the runoff from crops and contaminate sources of drinking water. Waste disposal sites can contaminate sources of drinking water through surface runoff or through infiltration to the ground water. In addition, animal wastes may be carried to lakes and streams by rainfall runoff or snow melt.

Consumption of drinking water may vary depending on levels of physical activity and changes in temperature and humidity. On a body weight basis, children drink more water than adults. For instance, the mean consumption rate of tap water by adults 20 years old and older is approximately 17 mL/kg/day. Tap water intake for children younger than 6 months is approximately 88 mL/kg/day. Table 4 presents tap water intake for various age groups. These values are based on consumers only and represent plain water directly ingested by the individual and indirect water that was added to foods and beverages during final preparation at home or by local food service establishments (eg, school cafeterias, restaurants).19 For this reason, these values exclude infants who are completely breastfed and infants who drink ready-to-use formula and are not consuming any tap water. Indirect water does not include water that was added by the manufacturer during processing of a food or water that is intrinsic in food.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 4. Estimate of Direct and Indirect Community Water Ingestion, Consumers Only19

 
Soil Intake
Children often put their hands, toys, and other objects in their mouths during normal exploration of their environment. This hand-to-mouth or object-to-mouth behavior may result in the ingestion of soil and dust. This behavior may present a risk to children when the soil and dust are contaminated. Children with "pica"—the habitual eating of nonfood objects—are at even greater risk as they may consume larger amounts of soil per day. To set soil cleanup standards, health officials need data on the amount of soil expected to be ingested by a child. Soil intake studies of young children have been conducted using methods that measure trace elements in feces and soil that are believed to be poorly absorbed in the gut. These measurements are used to estimate the amount of soil ingested over a specified time period by doing a mass balance using the measured amounts of tracer elements found in the various media. Soil ingestion studies conducted thus far included children between 2 and 6 years of age. Although children younger than 2 years are of concern because they are more likely to display hand-to-mouth behavior, data for this age group do not exist. Likewise, data do not exist for children older than 6 years. In addition, these studies have not been able to differentiate successfully between ingestion of soil and ingestion of dust. Children with pica may exhibit unusually high levels of soil ingestion. Data on ingestion rates by children with pica are very limited, and the behavior is considered to be relatively uncommon.

Children’s mean soil ingestion values ranged from 39 mg/day to 271 mg/day with an average of 138 mg/day for soil ingestion and 193 mg/day for soil and dust ingestion.20–25 Upper percentile values ranged from 104 mg/day to 1432 mg/day with an average of 358 mg/day for soil and 790 mg/day for soil and dust combined.20–25 Limitations of these data do not permit the derivation of a distribution of soil intake rates by children. Individuals were not studied for sufficient periods of time to get a good estimate of long-term behavior. In addition, inconsistencies among tracers and input/output misalignment errors indicate a fundamental problem with the methods currently used to estimate soil intake rates.

Mouthing Behavior
Young children, during normal exploration of their environment, mouth objects or their fingers.26 Children play close to the ground and are constantly licking their fingers or mouthing toys or objects. This mouthing behavior may result in exposure to toxic chemicals in the environment. For example, pesticide residues that have been transferred from treated surfaces to the hands or objects may be mouthed by children. This route of exposure may exceed other ingestion routes (eg, food, pica, drinking water, breast milk) and dermal exposure because nondietary ingestion may result in higher ingestion rates of contaminated material.27 In addition, because young children spend a lot of time indoors, contaminants that are deposited on surfaces in the home may be a concern. Mouthing behavior is intermittent and nonuniform, which makes it difficult to measure and model.28 For this reason, data on mouthing behavior are limited.

Some researchers express mouthing behavior in terms of frequency of occurrence (eg, contacts/hour, contacts/min). Others express mouthing behavior as a rate in units of minutes per hour of mouthing time. Four studies have examined mouthing behavior in children (Table 5).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 5. Summary of Mouthing Behavior Data

 
Inhalation Rates
Infants and young children have a higher resting metabolic rate and rate of oxygen consumption per unit body weight than adults because they have a larger surface per unit body weight and because they are growing rapidly. Therefore, their exposure to any air pollutant may be greater. An additional consideration is the smaller lung surface area/kg in the early stages of development. Thus, the higher amount of inspired air will affect a relatively smaller area of lung tissue.

Although oxygen consumption is a physiologic factor, it is affected by the level of activity. The oxygen consumption of a resting infant aged between 1 week and 1 year is 7 mL/kg body weight per minute. The rate for an adult under the same conditions is 3 to 5 mL/kg/min.29 Thus, on a body weight basis, the volume of air passing through the lungs of a resting infant is twice that of a resting adult under the same conditions, and therefore twice as much of any chemical in the atmosphere could reach the lungs of an infant. In addition to an increased need for oxygen relative to their size, children have narrower airways than those of adults. Thus, irritation caused by air pollution that would produce only a slight response in an adult can result in potentially significant obstruction in the airways of a young child. In addition, they often spend more time engaged in vigorous activities than adults.30 Table 6 summarizes studies conducted in California. Layton31 calculated breathing rates on the basis of oxygen consumption associated with energy expenditures. Energy expenditures were obtained from data collected in the USDA 1977–1978 food consumption survey. Table 7 summarizes inhalation rate data for various age categories. These data represent average values for the US population.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 6. Summary of Inhalation Rate Studies Conducted in California

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 7. Summary of Mean Daily and Activity-Specific Inhalation Rates

 
Soil Adherence
Children may be involved in several activities that may put them in contact with soil and dust. In addition to the ingestion and inhalation of soil and dust particles, children may be exposed to soil and dust through the dermal route. Soil can adhere to the skin, and contaminants found in soil can penetrate the dermal barrier. Although soil adherence itself is not a behavior, studies show that soil adherence is highly dependent on the type of activity3,32–35 (see Table 8). Soil adherence is expressed in units of milligrams of soil divided by surface area of the skin exposed. Experiments to determine soil loadings have been conducted on children engaged in various physical activities. These activities can be grouped into some general classes of low, moderate, or high soil contact. In general, the hands have the highest soil loadings. Likewise, activities involving high soil contact with wet soil result in high soil loadings. Exposure to environmental contaminants may be reduced by handwashing after active play outdoors.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 8. Geometric Mean and Geometric Standard Deviations of Soil Adherence by Activity and Body Region

 
Activity Factors
When considering exposures, one must look at the exposures of an individual over the course of time. Children move through several environments during the course of a day: going to school, going to child care, going to play, and sleeping. What is needed is a sum total of all of the exposures and/or an idea of the total exposure, but we are usually not able to put monitors on children to measure their total exposure. Usually our estimates of exposure are from retrospective estimates.

Understanding children’s activity patterns and time spent in various microenvironments is important to understand exposure to potentially harmful environmental pollutants. Microenvironment is defined as the location that the child occupies (eg, indoors, outdoors, home, school). The physical location of children changes as they grow. The newborn frequently spends more time in a single environment for prolonged periods of time (eg, a crib) rather than in several different environments. Infants and toddlers are frequently placed on the floor, carpet, or grass. Therefore, they may have much more exposure to chemicals associated with these surfaces, such as formaldehyde and volatile organic chemicals from synthetic carpet and pesticide residues from flea bombs.36,37 In addition, the breathing zone for an adult is typically 4 to 6 feet above the floor. However, for a child, it will be closer to the floor and dependent on the height and mobility of the child. Within lower breathing zones, chemicals that are heavier than air, such as mercury vapor, may concentrate.38 This is 1 factor that may have accounted for a case of acrodynia in a Michigan child who was exposed to mercury vapor from latex house paint.39

Preambulatory children also may experience sustained exposure to noxious agents because they cannot remove themselves from their environment. An example is the infant who is badly sunburned as a result of the inability to protect him- or herself. It has been shown that the risk of skin cancer is most closely related to the amount of sun damage that the skin sustains during the first 18 years of life.40

Certain activities and behaviors specific to children place them at higher risk of exposure to certain environmental agents.41 An activity or time spent will vary on the basis of culture, hobbies, location, gender, age, and personal preferences. It is difficult to collect/record accurately data on a child’s activity patterns.42 Because children engage in more contact activities than adults, a much wider distribution of activities needs to be considered when assessing exposure.42 Behavioral patterns and preferred activities result in different exposures for children in different developmental stages.41

This section summarizes information on various activities, length of time spent performing these activities, and locations and length of time spent by individuals within those various microenvironments. We focus on those activities that are deemed the most important in assessing children’s exposures. Young children spend most of their time indoors at home.3 Because infants and toddlers spend a significant amount of time in the house, they may use only 1 source of tap water. Information about the amount of time spent indoors is necessary to assess exposures related to indoor air environments. Older children spend a significant part of their lives at school. Schools are frequently near highways (auto emissions and lead), under power lines (electromagnetic fields), or on old industrial sites (benzene, arsenic). Schools made frequent use of asbestos as a building material and commonly use pesticides for ground and building management.43 Because child care facilities range from private homes to institutional facilities and the environments of child care facilities are less regulated than schools, little is known about these physical environments.

Adolescents not only have a new school environment but also begin to self-determine physical environments, often misjudging or ignoring the risks to themselves.44 In addition, many adolescents have part-time jobs that place them in physical environments that may be hazardous as a result of occupational exposures.45

Other activities, such as time spent showering, bathing, swimming, and playing in grass or gravel, may also be important. Because young children tend to take baths rather than showers and bathing generally takes more time than showering, their exposure may be higher because the duration may be longer. Swimming may be another source of dermal, inhalation, and ingestion exposures. Water may be inadvertently swallowed during swimming. Children may be exposed to chemicals found in swimming pools or contaminants found in water bodies.

A comprehensive list of activities, locations, and length of time spent on these activities is available.3 Several studies have been conducted to obtain data on children’s time use. Most of these studies have been done using time diary methods. Tables 9 and 10 provide a summary of a selected group of activities in which children are engaged. Activities can vary significantly with differences in age.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 9. Summary of Mean Time Spent Indoors and Outdoors From Several Studies

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 10. Summary of Data on Activity Factors

 

   DATA GAPS AND CONCLUSIONS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 BEHAVIORS AND PHYSIOLOGIC NEEDS...
 EXPOSURE DATA RELEVANT TO...
 DATA GAPS AND CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
 
Although much information is available in the published literature and there has been a recent increased emphasis on children’s environmental research, large data gaps still exist. For example, fetal exposure may occur through maternal exposure to environmental chemicals as substances cross the placenta.46 Exposure factors data related to fetal exposures are limited. Other areas in which research related to childhood exposures is needed are3
  • Breast milk consumption and the incidence and duration of breastfeeding
  • Children’s food handling practices that might exacerbate exposure
  • Fish intake among children, particularly recreational and subsistence populations
  • Consumption of ethnic foods by children. The term "ethnic" here refers to foods pertaining to a group of people recognized as a class on the basis of certain distinctive characteristics such as religion, language, ancestry, culture, or national origin.
  • Better estimates of soil intake rates, particularly at the upper percentiles. Research is also needed to refine the methods to calculate soil intake rates and to better understand the relative contribution of soil versus dust ingestion.
  • Nondietary ingestion and dermal exposure factors, such as the microenvironments in which children spend time and the types of materials with which they come in contact, as well as information on the rate at which they come in contact with contaminated surfaces, the fraction of the contaminants that are transferred to skin and object surfaces, and the amount of the object/skin entering the mouth
  • Better soil adherence rates for additional activities involving children
  • Frequency and duration of use and kinds of consumer products used by children
  • Derivation of new surface areas based on newer body weight data
  • Inhalation rates that are specific to children’s activities and overall 24-hour breathing rates
  • Biomarkers of exposure need to be developed to improve estimates of exposure
  • Methods to extrapolate from short-term to long-term or chronic exposures
  • Studies that link exposures to specific health outcomes

Children’s physiology and behavior during various life stages may put them at higher risk from environmental exposures. On a body weight basis, children breathe more air, drink more water, and consume more of certain foods than adults. Children also engage in activities that may put them in contact with contaminants in the environment (eg, crawling, mouthing behavior). Understanding these differences between adults and children is important when assessing environmental health risks to children.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Appendix 1. Food Definitions for the Major Food Groups3

 


   ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
Dr Bearer was supported by grants from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism/NIH (R01AA11839), the National Institute on Environmental Health Science/NIH/EPA (P01 ES11261), AAMC/CDC/ATSDR Cooperative Agreement, MM-0122-02/02, and the Mary Ann Swetland Center for Environmental Health.


   FOOTNOTES
 
Received for publication Oct 7, 2003; Accepted Oct 20, 2003.

Reprint requests to (J.M.) US Environmental Protection Agency (8623D), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave, Washington, DC 20460. E-mail: moya.jacqueline{at}epa.gov

The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the US Environmental Protection Agency or the US Department of Health and Human Services.


   REFERENCES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 BEHAVIORS AND PHYSIOLOGIC NEEDS...
 EXPOSURE DATA RELEVANT TO...
 DATA GAPS AND CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Campbell SF. Piaget Sampler: An Introduction to Jean Piaget Through His Own Words. New York, NY: John Wiley; 1976
  2. USEPA. Summary Report of the Technical Workshop on Issues Associated With Considering Developmental Changes in Behavior and Anatomy When Assessing Exposure to Children. Washington, DC: Office of Research and Development; 2000 (EPA/630/R-00/005)
  3. USEPA. Child-Specific Exposure Factors Handbook. Interim Final. Washington, DC: National Center for Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development; 2002 (EPA/600/P-00/002B)
  4. American Academy of Pediatrics. Breastfeeding and the use of human milk. Pediatrics.1997; 100 :1035 –1039[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. Etzel RA, ed. Handbook of Pediatric Environmental Health. Elk Grove Village, IL: American Academy of Pediatrics; 1999:155
  6. Bates MN, Hannah DJ, Buckland SJ, Taucher JA, Van Maanen T. Chlorinated organic contaminants in breast milk of New Zealand women. Environ Health Perspect1994; 102(suppl 1) :211 –217
  7. Lakind JS, Berlin CM, Park CN, Naiman DQ, Gudka NJ. Methodology for characterizing distributions of incremental body burdens of 2,3,7,8-TCDD and DDE from breast milk in North American nursing infants. J Toxicol Environ Health A.2000; 59 :605 –639[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  8. Fürst P, Fürst C, Wilmers K. Human milk as a bioindicator for body burden of PCDDs, PCDFs, organochlorine pesticides, and PCBs. Environ Health Perspect.1994; 102(suppl 1) :187 –193
  9. Pao EM, Hines JM, Roche AF. Milk intakes and feeding patterns of breast-fed infants. J Am Diet Assoc.1980; 77 :540 –545[Web of Science][Medline]
  10. Butte NF, Garza C, Smith EO, Nichols BL. Human milk intake and growth in exclusively breast-fed infants. J Pediatr.1984; 104 :187 –195[Web of Science][Medline]
  11. Neville MC, Keller R, Seacat J, Lutes V, Neifert M. Studies in human lactation: milk volumes in lactating women during the onset of lactation and full lactation. Am J Clin Nutr.1988; 48 :1375 –1386[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  12. Dewey KG, Lönnerdal B. Milk and nutrient intake of breast-fed infants from 1 to 6 months: relation to growth and fatness. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr.1983; 2 :497 –506[Web of Science][Medline]
  13. Dewey KG, Heinig J, Nommsen L, Lönnerdal B. Adequacy of energy intake among breast-fed infants in the DARLING study: relationships to growth, velocity, morbidity, and activity levels. J Pediatr.1991; 119 :538 –547[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  14. Dewey KG, Heinig J, Nommsen LA, Lönnerdal B. Maternal versus infant factors related to breast milk intake and residual volume: the DARLING study. Pediatrics.1991; 87 :829 –837[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. National Academy of Sciences. Nutrition During Lactation. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1991
  16. Maxwell NI, Burmaster DE. A simulation model to estimate a distribution of lipid intake from breast milk during the first year of life. J Expo Anal Environ Epidemiol.1993; 3 :383 –406[Web of Science][Medline]
  17. Falciglia GA, Couch SC, Gribbie LS, Pabst SM, Frank R. Food neophobia in childhood affects dietary variety. J Am Diet Assoc.2000; 100 :1474 –1481[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  18. Zeise L, Painter P, Berteau PE, Fan AM, Jackson RJ. Alar in fruit: limited regulatory action in the face of uncertain risks. In: Garrick BJ, Gekler WC, eds. The Analysis, Communication, and Perception of Risk. New York, NY: Plenum Press; 1991:275–284
  19. USEPA. Estimated Per Capita Water Ingestion in the United States. Washington, DC: Office of Water; 2000 (EPA-822-00-008)
  20. Davis S, Waller P, Buschbon R, Ballou J, White P. Quantitative estimates of soil ingestion in normal children between the ages of 2 and 7 years: population based estimates using aluminum, silicon, and titanium as soil tracer elements. Arch Environ Health.1990; 45 :112 –122[Web of Science][Medline]
  21. Calabrese EJ, Pastides H, Barnes R, Edwards C, Kostecki PT. How much soil do young children ingest: an epidemiologic study. In: Petroleum Contaminated Soils. Chelsea, MI: Lewis Publishers; 1989:363–397
  22. Stanek EJ, Calabrese EJ. Daily estimates of soil ingestion in children. Environ Health Perspect.1995; 103 :276 –285[Web of Science][Medline]
  23. Stanek EJ, Calabrese EJ. Soil ingestion estimates for use in site evaluations based on the best tracer method. Hum Ecol Risk Assess.1995; 1 :133 –156
  24. Van Wijnen JH, Clausing P, Brunekreff B. Estimated soil ingestion by children. Environ Res.1990; 51 :147 –162[Medline]
  25. Calabrese EJ, Stanek EJ, Pekow P, Barnes RM. Soil ingestion estimates for children residing on a Superfund site. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf.1997; 36 :258 –268[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  26. Groot M, Lekkerkerk M, Steenbekkers L. Mouthing behavior of young children—an observational study. Agricultural University Wageningen, The Netherlands. Household and Consumer Studies Report No. 3. September 1998
  27. Weaver V, Buckley T, Groopman J. Approaches to environmental exposure assessment in children. Environ Health Perspect.1998; 106 :827 –831
  28. Zartarian V, Ferguson A, Leckie J. Quantified dermal activity data from a four-child pilot field study. J Expo Anal Environ Epidemiol.1997; 7 :543 –553[Web of Science][Medline]
  29. World Health Organization. Principles for Evaluating Health Risks From Chemicals During Infancy and Early Childhood: The Need for a Special Approach. Environmental Health Criteria 59. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, International Programme on Chemical Safety; 1986
  30. American Academy of Pediatrics. Ambient air pollution: respiratory hazard to children. Pediatrics.1993; 91 :1210 –1213. Available at: www.aap.org/policy/04408.html[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  31. Layton DW. Metabolically consistent breathing rates for use in dose assessments. Health Phys.1993; 64 :23 –36[Web of Science][Medline]
  32. US EPA. Dermal exposure assessment: principles and applications. Washington, DC: Office of Research and Development, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment/OHEA; 1992 (USEPA/600/8-9-91)
  33. USEPA. Exposure Factors Handbook. Washington, DC: National Center for Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development; 1997 (EPA/600/P-95/002Fa,b,c)
  34. Kissel J, Richter K, Fenske R. Field measurements of dermal soil loading attributable to various activities: implications for exposure assessment. Risk Anal.1996; 16 :116 –125
  35. Holmes KK, Kissel JC, Richter KY. Investigation of the influence of oil on soil adherence to skin. J Soil Contam.1996; 5 :301 –308
  36. Bernstein RS, Stayner LT, Elliot LJ, Kimbrough R, Falk J, Blade L. Inhalation exposures to formaldehyde: an overview of its toxicology, epidemiology, monitoring, and control. Am Ind Hyg Assoc.1984; 261 :1183 –1187
  37. Fenske RA, Black KG, Elkner KP, Lee CL, Methner MM, Soto R. Potential exposure and health risks of infants following indoor residential pesticide applications. Am J Public Health.1990; 80 :689 –693[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  38. Leaderer BP. Assessing exposures to environmental tobacco smoke. Risk Anal.1990; 10 :19 –26[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  39. Agocs MA, Etzel RA, Parrish RG, et al. Mercury exposure from interior latex paint. N Engl J Med.1990; 323 :1096 –1101[Abstract]
  40. Weinstock MA, Colditz GA, Willett WC, et al. Nonfamilial cutaneous melanoma incidence in women associated with sun exposure before 20 years of age. Pediatrics.1989; 84 :199 –204[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  41. Chance WG, Harmsen E. Children are different: environmental contaminants and children’s health. Can J Public Health.1998; 89(suppl) :59 –513
  42. Hubal EA, Sheldon LS, Burke JM, et al. Children’s exposure assessment: a review of factors influencing children’s exposure, and the data available to characterize and assess that exposure. Environ Health Prospect.2000; 108 :475 –486
  43. American Academy of Pediatrics, Committee on Environmental Hazards. Asbestos exposure in schools. Pediatrics.1987; 79 :301 –305[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  44. Perry CL, Silvis GL. Smoking prevention: behavioral prescriptions for the pediatrician. Pediatrics.1987; 79 :790 –799[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  45. Pollack SH, Landrigan PH, Mallino DL. Child labor in 1990: prevalence and health hazards. Annu Rev Public Health.1990; 11 :359 –375[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  46. Children’s Environmental Health Network. The Training Manual on Pediatric Environmental Health: Putting It Into Perspective. Emeryville, CA: Children’s Environmental Health Network; 1999. Available at: www.cehn.org
  47. Reed K, Jimenez M, Freeman N, Lioy P. Quantification of children’s hand and mouthing activities through a videotaping methodology. J Expo Anal Environ Epidemiol.1999; 9 :513 –520[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  48. Linn WS, Shamoo DA, Hackney JD. Documentation of activity patterns in "high-risk" groups exposed to ozone in the Los Angeles area. In: Proceedings of the Second EPA/AWMA Conference on Tropospheric Ozone, Atlanta, Nov. 1991. Pittsburgh, PA: Air and Waste Management Assoc; 1992:701–712
  49. Spier CE, Little DE, Trim SC, Johnson TR, Linn WS, Hackney JD. Activity patterns in elementary and high school students exposed to oxidant pollution. J Exp Anal Environ Epidemiol.1992; 2 :277 –293[Web of Science][Medline]
  50. Adams WC. Measurement of Breathing Rate and Volume in Routinely Performed Daily Activities, Final Report. Davis, CA: California Air Resources Board (CARB); 1993 (Contract No. A033-205)
  51. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines Part IV: Technical Support Document for Exposure Assessment and Stochastic Analysis. Oakland, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, Cal/ EPA; 2000. Available at: www.oehha.ca.gov
  52. Timmer SG, Eccles J, O’Brien K. How children use time. In: Juster FT, Stafford FP, eds. Time, Goods, and Well-Being. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Research; 1985:353–380
  53. Robinson JP, Thomas J. Time Spent in Activities, Locations, and Microenvironments: A California-National Comparison Project Report. Las Vegas, NV: US Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory; 1991
  54. Wiley JA, Robinson JP, Cheng Y, Piazza T, Stork L, Plasden K. Study of Children’s Activity Patterns. Sacramento, CA: California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board Research Division; 1991
  55. Tsang AM, Klepeis NE. Results tables from a detailed analysis of the National Human Activity Pattern Survey (NHAPS) response. Report prepared for the US Environmental Protection Agency by Lockheed Martin; 1996 (Contract No. 68-W6–001, Delivery Order No. 13)
PEDIATRICS (ISSN 1098-4275). ©2004 by the American Academy of Pediatrics

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J Health PsycholHome page
B. R. Barnes
The Politics of Behavioural Change for Environmental Health Promotion in Developing Countries
J Health Psychol, May 1, 2007; 12(3): 531 - 538.
[Abstract] [PDF]

eLetters:

Read all eLetters

methods
Vanessa Y Davis
Pediatrics Online, 16 Oct 2007 [Full text]
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow View responses
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Moya, J.
Right arrow Articles by Etzel, R. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Moya, J.
Right arrow Articles by Etzel, R. A.
Related Collections
Right arrow Therapeutics & Toxicology
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?