Search

Abstract Background Epidemiological evidence showing a consistent association between the risk of childhood leukaemia and exposure to power frequency magnetic fields has been accumulating. This debate considers the additional precautionary intervention needed to manage this risk, when it exceeds the protection afforded by the exposure guidelines as recommended by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection. Methods The Bradford-Hill Criteria are guidelines for evaluating the scientific evidence that low frequency magnetic fields cause childhood leukaemia. The criteria are used for assessing the strength of scientific evidence and here have been applied to considering the strength of evidence that exposures to extremely low frequency magnetic fields may increase the risk of childhood leukaemia. The applicability of precaution is considered using the risk management framework outlined in a European Commission (EC) communication on the Precautionary Principle. That communication advises that measures should be proportionate, non-discriminatory, consistent with similar measures already taken, based on an examination of the benefits and costs of action and inaction, and subject to review in the light of new scientific findings. Results The main evidence for a risk is an epidemiological association observed in several studies and meta-analyses; however, the number of highly exposed children is small and the association could be due to a combination of selection bias, confounding and chance. Corroborating experimental evidence is limited insofar as there is no clear indication of harm at the field levels implicated; however, the aetiology of childhood leukaemia is poorly understood. Taking a precautionary approach suggests that low-cost intervention to reduce exposure is appropriate. This assumes that if the risk is real, its impact is likely to be small. It also recognises the consequential cost of any major intervention. The recommendation is controversial in that other interpretations of the data are possible, and low-cost intervention may not fully alleviate the risk. Conclusions The debate shows how the EC risk management framework can be used to apply the Precautionary Principle to small and uncertain public health risks. However, despite the need for evidence-based policy making, many of the decisions remain value driven and therefore subjective.

Background: The unexpected changes caused by the COVID-19 pandemic related to the fear of developing the disease, and the need for social distancing and isolation have had an effect on people's mental health. These drastic changes can result in the development of anxiety, depressive symptoms and sense of loneliness. Elderly and chronically ill individuals are at a particularly high risk of developing COVID-19, suffering severe illness and dying as a result of it., Aim of the Study: The aim of the study was to assess the prevalence of anxiety, depressive symptoms, irritability and loneliness in the elderly aged 60 years and older as a group exposed to the negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, and to analyze the relationships between loneliness and mental health of the respondents and sociodemographic variables and chronic diseases., Materials and Methods: The study was conducted in Poland among 221 individuals aged 60+. The study material was collected using a sociodemographic questionnaire, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-M) and a revised University of California Los Angeles loneliness scale (R-UCLA). Women accounted for 47.51% and men for 52.49% of study participants; the mean age was 65.18 (SD = 4.06)., Results: In total, according to HADS-M, depressive symptoms were present in 19.15% of the participants and borderline states in 14.18% of them. Based on R-UCLA, moderate and moderately high sense of loneliness was present in 58.83% of the participants. Sense of loneliness was significantly correlated with the prevalence of depressive symptoms (p < 0.001)., Conclusions: In this study, one in five participants experienced anxiety and depressive symptoms. Two out of three participants experienced a moderate sense of loneliness. Individuals who displayed a higher level of loneliness also had a higher severity of anxiety level depressive symptoms and irritability. Elderly individuals should be under special care due to their high risk of experiencing physical and mental effects of the COVID-19 pandemic., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: The data of the International Diabetes Federation show that about 463 million people have diabetes. Better understanding of psychosocial aspects of life with this disease has become one of healthcare priorities in this group of patients. The aim of this study was to assess the relationships between loneliness and blood glucose control in diabetic patients., Methods: The study included 250 hospitalized patients with type 1 and 2 diabetes. The patients included in the study were those who had had diabetes for at least 1 year and received pharmacotherapy. Standardized Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale (R-UCLA) and an analysis of patient test results including 10 indicators of blood glucose control were used for data collection. Correlation analysis, i.e. Pearson's linear correlation coefficient (r, parametric method), was used for hypothesis verification., Results: Less than one-fifth (16%) of the patients included in the study had higher loneliness index (based on the R-UCLA scale), and this loneliness index (total result) was significantly correlated with higher blood pressure. No significant correlations were demonstrated between loneliness and the other 9 indicators of blood glucose control., Conclusions: Systolic blood pressure was significantly correlated with loneliness in patients with diabetes. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings.