Usage Information
Citation Information: J Clin Invest. 1970;49(1):106-118. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI106209.
Abstract
Acute exposures to hemp dust, in healthy subjects as well as hemp workers with byssinosis, resulted in two different responses. Men with symptoms (chest tightness, coughing, and wheezing) after exposure showed decreases of forced expiratory volumes (FEV1.0), flow rates on maximum expiratory flow-volume (MEFV) curves, and of vital capacity (VC), while airway conductance (Gaw: TGV ratio) did not decrease significantly (“flow rate response”). Men without symptoms after exposure showed no changes of VC, FEV1.0, and MEFV curves, but had a significantly decreased airway conductance (“conductance response”). The flow rate response is attributed to a pharmacological bronchoconstrictor effect of hemp dust on small airways, the conductance response to a mechanical or reflex effect of hemp dust on large airways. Both responses were abolished by a bronchodilator drug. The type of response reflects a difference between individuals and is not related to age, smoking habits, or prior exposure history. Men with normal control function data had either a flow rate or a conductance response. All men with abnormal control data had a flow rate response.
Authors
A. Bouhuys, K. P. Van de Woestijne
Usage data is cumulative from May 2024 through May 2025.
| Usage | JCI | PMC |
|---|---|---|
| Text version | 108 | 2 |
| 43 | 17 | |
| Scanned page | 422 | 5 |
| Citation downloads | 52 | 0 |
| Totals | 625 | 24 |
| Total Views | 649 | |
Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.
Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.
Copyright © 2025 American Society for Clinical Investigation
ISSN: 0021-9738 (print), 1558-8238 (online)