Oral and oronasal breathing during continuous exercise produce similar responses to ozone inhalation.

Breathing route has a profound effect on sulfur dioxide-induced pulmonary function response in human subjects. There is comparatively little evidence of the effects of oral, nasal, and oronasal breathing on ozone (O3)-induced responses in humans. In this study, six young adult males were exposed on five occasions to 0.40 parts per million (ppm) O3 while exercising continuously at one of two workloads (minute ventilation, VE, of approximately 30 and 75 l/min). The VE exposure time product was similar for all protocols. Four exposures were delivered randomly with a Hans-Rudolph respiratory valve attached to a silicone facemask, with breathing route effected with and without noseclip. A 2 x 2 analysis of variance revealed no statistically significant differences (p less than .05) across conditions in pulmonary function, exercise ventilatory pattern, or subjective symptoms responses. The fifth exposure, delivered via the same respiratory valve with mouthpiece, but without facemask, revealed significantly greater forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1.0) impairment than that observed for the respiratory valve, facemask with noseclip exposure (-20.4% and -15.9%, respectively). The latter suggests partial O3 reactivity to the facemask and clean shaven facial surface of the subjects, although reduced oral scrubbing by mouthpiece-induced bypassing of the oral vestibule might account, in part, for this difference. Recent O3 uptake evidence from another laboratory, however, supports our conclusion that breathing route during moderate and heavy continuous exercise does not affect acute physiologic responses to 0.40 ppm O3.