Search

The goal of engineering the microbiome of the built environment is to create places and spaces that are better for human health. Like other emerging technologies, engineering the microbiome of the built environment may bring considerable benefits but there has been a lack of exploration on its societal implication and how to engineer in an ethical way. To date, this topic area has also not been pulled together into a singular study for any systematic review or analysis. This study fills this gap by providing the first a systematic review of societal and ethical implications of engineering microbiomes and the application of this knowledge to engineering the microbiome of the built environment. To organize and guide our analysis, we invoked four major ethical principles (individual good/non-maleficence, collective good/beneficence, autonomy, and justice) as a framework for characterizing and categorizing 15 distinct themes that emerged from the literature. We argue that these different themes can be used to explain and predict the social and ethical implications of engineering the microbiome of the built environment that if addressed adequately can help to improve public health as this field further develops at global scales. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This document explores the relationship between engineering and public health, emphasizing the importance of integrating the two fields in infrastructure design. It discusses how engineered systems can impact public health by influencing exposure to health hazards. The document also highlights the historical context of this relationship and the challenges and opportunities in integrating engineering and public health. It calls for interdisciplinary collaboration and proactive approaches to enhance public health outcomes in infrastructure development. Additionally, the document discusses the role of policy and regulation in supporting this integration and addresses specific research articles that explore various topics related to engineering and public health. Overall, the document emphasizes the need for holistic, sustainable, and equitable approaches to address complex public health issues. [Extracted from the article]

The COVID-19 pandemic strained the infrastructure of public health systems worldwide and unearthed the social and institutional challenges of operating in a global crisis. This was exacerbated in the United States (U.S.), as public risk communication messages from local, state and federal public officials were rife with conflicting information. In this article, we unpack the perils of flawed risk communication and how it puts people at greater risk for infection and other secondary risks stemming from the pandemic mitigation behaviors. The choice to engage in preventive behaviors, such as social distancing, wearing facemasks, and frequently washing hands, differed dramatically across populations. On one extreme, some individuals, which we call the under-cautious, were hesitant to follow public health guidance regarding preventive behaviors, putting them at risk for COVID-19-associated morbidity. On the other end of this spectrum is another group, the over-cautious, who chose to physically remove themselves from social interactions, going beyond appropriate recommendations from experts to mitigate risk. This group may experience greater secondary risks associated with the pandemic, such as mental health issues, obesity, and a sedentary lifestyle. The infrastructural and communication challenges encountered during the COVID-19 pandemic must be further explored and mitigated. In the future, these campaigns need to target both the under-cautious and the over-cautious, as both extreme groups can potentially suffer health consequences in a pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chemical exposures from consumer products are a major concern in modern society. To address the need for accurate health risk estimation, particularly for chronic chemical hazards that may be less evident such as those contained in consumer products, this study reports on the development of the Population Attributable Risk Screening Tool (PAR Tool) Version 1.0. The PAR Tool was designed for the use of professional staff at the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), and assumes some prior knowledge of chemical risk assessment. This tool provides reasonable estimates of potential acute and chronic health impacts and mortality resulting from exposure to chemicals in consumer products. The PAR Tool provides the ability to integrate diverse data sources, including consumer product composition, user exposures, chemical toxicity data, consumer use patterns, and other pertinent factors to estimate the Population Attributable Risk associated with exposures to chemical components in consumer products. By generating PAR estimates on a chemical-by-chemical basis, the tool will assist the CPSC in assessing potential health risks and prioritizing efforts for risk reduction. Output from the tool provides an estimate of the number of specific health outcomes that may occur in the population of users of a specific consumer product. Interim steps produce exposure percentiles that are used along with dose–response data for a selected chemical and exposure pathway to calculate the proportion of the population at risk. The output is an estimated number of cases of an adverse health effect or mortality in a product user population potentially related to exposures to a single chemical in a product. These results are based primarily on user inputs, and the rationale for selection of these inputs is documented. All inputs and calculations within the PAR Tool are traceable and based on accepted practices and resources. The ongoing development of the PAR Tool aims to enhance its functionalities, incorporating features such as uncertainty analysis, increased automation, and user support. For example, future iterations may allow CPSC users to analyze multiple chemicals and health endpoints simultaneously and introduce sensitivity analysis capabilities for exposure and toxicity parameters. Ultimately, the PAR Tool represents a valuable advancement in comprehending product risks related to consumer product exposure, contributing to enhanced consumer protection and improved health outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Our society is currently facing an unprecedented number of environmental and societal challenges. Stakeholder and community engagement can help identify priority issues and needs at local levels. One approach to engage stakeholders and communities in the contexts of environmental, health, and societal challenges is to leverage outreach and extension programs. Within this context, and to help identify priority issues to focus subsequent research and extension programs in North Carolina (NC), a survey was conducted with extension agents to identify priority issues as they relate to environmental health and risks and related needs. Based on responses from 66 study participants that represented half of the 100 NC counties, we found that Water pollution, Flooding, Natural resources management, and Engaging stakeholders were top priority issues across all environmental health and risk topics. Participants also identified that practices of Engaging stakeholders as well as Assessing, Managing, and Communicating risks were increasingly important. Participants indicated they needed a moderate-to-significant amount of guidance across a range of areas related to assessing, managing, communicating, and making decisions regarding environmental health and risk topics, as well as engaging with local communities. Outcomes from this work can not only help inform subsequent research and outreach efforts at local scales, but this work demonstrates a simple, low-cost approach to elicit perspectives and priorities can be leveraged in other states and regions with established stakeholder and community outreach programs more broadly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The SARS-CoV-2 novel coronavirus pandemic has revealed many scientific, social, and institutional challenges required to improve the health and wellbeing of individuals stricken by this disease. While organizations and governing institutions have risen to the task to concurrently prepare for and respond to this pandemic under conditions of high uncertainty and extreme pressure, another important aspect of this viral infection deserves attention and is not being fully considered, that is early intervention strategies and structured tools for individuals who test positive for the virus and begin developing symptoms. For those whose infection is progressing, we describe the potential benefits of a self-monitoring tool for use in combination with physician directed early medical interventions to slow COVID-19 progression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Various emerging technologies challenge existing governance processes to identify, assess, and manage risk. Though the existing risk-based paradigm has been essential for assessment of many chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear technologies, a complementary approach may be warranted for the early-stage assessment and management challenges of high uncertainty technologies ranging from nanotechnology to synthetic biology to artificial intelligence, among many others. This paper argues for a risk governance approach that integrates quantitative experimental information alongside qualitative expert insight to characterize and balance the risks, benefits, costs, and societal implications of emerging technologies. Various articles in scholarly literature have highlighted differing points of how to address technological uncertainty, and this article builds upon such knowledge to explain how an emerging technology risk governance process should be driven by a multi-stakeholder effort, incorporate various disparate sources of information, review various endpoints and outcomes, and comparatively assess emerging technology performance against existing conventional products in a given application area. At least in the early stages of development when quantitative data for risk assessment remain incomplete or limited, such an approach can be valuable for policymakers and decision makers to evaluate the impact that such technologies may have upon human and environmental health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The term “climate change” has evolved from what was originally a technical term employed by scientists into a symbolic referent involving complex social, political, and moral considerations that have spurred worldwide debate. As evidence of the anthropogenic influence on the Earth’s climate has grown over the past few decades, climate change has come to be viewed as a primary challenge to be confronted in the twenty-first century. Geoengineering, or climate engineering, is a set of large-scale technological interventions proposed to offset climatic changes. This study seeks to understand which factors contribute to, or alternatively, detract from public acceptance of geoengineering through robust path analytic modeling of public perceptions of geoengineering that may better serve the academic community and decision-makers. This study finds that familiarity, epistemic trust, preference for alternative solutions to climate change, and media consumption are interrelated in their influences on opinions toward geoengineering proposals and support for funding further geoengineering research. Such predictive modeling can enable risk communicators and policy-makers with vital information to support anticipatory governance approaches to policy initiatives and improve future public engagement and communication about geoengineering. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]