The Clean Air Act requires that sensitive subgroups of exposed populations be protected from adverse health effects of air pollution exposure. Hence, data suggesting the existence of sensitive subgroups can have an important impact on regulatory decisions. Some investigators have interpreted differences among individuals in observed pulmonary function response to air pollution episodes as evidence that individuals differ in their sensitivity. An alternative explanation is that the differences are due entirely to normal variation in repeated pulmonary function measurements. This paper investigates this question by reanalyzing data from three studies of children exposed to air pollution episodes to determine whether the observed variability in pulmonary function response indicates differences in sensitivity or natural interoccasion variability. One study investigated exposures to total suspended particulates (TSP), the other two investigated exposure to ozone. In all studies, each child's response to air pollution exposures was summarized by regressing that child's set of pulmonary function measurements on the air pollution concentrations on the day or days before measurement. The within-child and between-child variances of these slopes were used to test the hypothesis of variable sensitivity. Regression slopes did not vary significantly among children exposed to episodes of high TSP concentration, but there was evidence of heterogeneity in both studies of ozone exposures. The finding of heterogeneous response to ozone exposure is consistent with the epidemiologic and chamber studies of ozone exposures, but the lack of evidence for heterogeneous response to TSP exposures implies that observed variation in response can be explained by sampling variability rather than the presence of sensitive subgroup.
展开▼
